Serenitynow
Member
I'll happily take Pocket Edition if they throw in a few shadows and actually bother to animate the mouths.
-
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.
Final Fantasy XV Switch hinted
- Thread starter wanders
- Start date
Obviously the Switch isn't powerful, I've said as much, I've only said that it takes astonishing ignorance to equivocate the platform with last gen as it has more in common with modern platforms. Square is a business, if they can get away with doing the bare minimum they will. Even if one were to believe it technically impossible to get the engine working on the Switch, it illustrates that the Switch isn't as fast as the PS4 which I've maintained, not that it's got more commonalities with last-generation platforms.
IronicSonic
Member
Wheres is that octopath project though
That's true but it also has less main memory bandwidth than PS3 and is closer to last gen in shader throughput, especially in portable mode.
It's undeniably better than PS360U, but there are enough caveats to its performance that the jury is still out on if it can faithfully reproduce modern AAA visuals.
This is a contradiction though. How can it be astonishing ignorance to say switch is slightly closer to last gen, but at the same time say you appreciate it is significantly underpowered enough not to be able to support games from this gen? We're both sitting at marginally different points in between PS3 and PS4 and yet my position is astonishing ignorance?
What is this magical point in the scale which is significantly less powerful than current gen, but also not so significantly underpowered that it's closer to this gen than last, but also at the same time way way way more powerful than anyone saying it's closer to last gen than this (because that would be ignorance).
Please enlighten me with your numbers.
Good Guy Gone Bad
Member
I'm not sure Square Enix would think that it's worth the cost of porting this game from the mess of the Luminous Engine to the Switch, while also having to significantly alter the game wrt assets, textures, resolution, etc for such a small userbase (currently).
Whereas the pocket edition is likely a pretty straightforward port-up as it's not built off of the disaster that is the Luminous Engine and is likely a significantly less cost to develop than porting down the game that already has issues running on a PS4/X1.
Whereas the pocket edition is likely a pretty straightforward port-up as it's not built off of the disaster that is the Luminous Engine and is likely a significantly less cost to develop than porting down the game that already has issues running on a PS4/X1.
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
It looks really bad though. If this is a $20 eShop game that'd be fine but if it's supposed to be a major retail release then they shouldn't bother.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
SE must have some incredible devs if they made a game thats visually on par with witcher 3 and runs better on a disaster engine.
I should note that I'm hoping they use the pocket version as a base and work from there to make it into a full game, if it's literally just the mobile game on Switch I wouldn't bother.
The camera angle from the pocket version would make it much easier to support multiplayer single screen playing if they were to go that way. I wonder how close they could get the battle system to the original (or if they even should).
For me, if for the Switch version they can expand it out so it feels like a full fledged game, rather than a series of action sequences, and then give it some visual flair (like mouths opening, better ui) that could become my favorite version of the game for sure. Don't dislike FFXV at all either. But the araena fight looked amazing on the pocket edition. Really pretty, so I'm defo not against the style.
mugurumakensei
Member
Multiple things.
1) Newer GPUs are more efficient at certain tasks that allows them to reach theoretical maximums more often. While the PS3 was 200 GFlops, in practice, it could not utilize its power efficiently. Therefore, even though officially the Wii U GPU was rated lower than PS3, the Wii U GPU outperformed the PS3 GPU in most cases. The Switch is several more generations past the Wii U so the differential in terms of efficiency is even greater when comparing Switch vs PS3/360.
2) 400 GFLOPs is not the full story. Portions of the GPU workload can be done utilizing FP16 which brings performance much closer to 512 GFLOPs+.
3) The Switch also has a much better CPU architecture and much more RAM. Switch is much more in line with PS4/XONE in this case. Whereas the other two are fuzzy based on developer goals, ability, commitment, and the underlying rendering middleware.
That said, a version of Pocket edition with more detailed models and textures, cel shading, and the full overworld would probably be a better use of effort. It'd be different, have a timeless art style, and would be respectful of SE's handheld audience.
lord_of_flood
Member
I doubt they would be able to port the PS4/X1 versions, but if they can use the Pocket Edition as a base, dress it up a lot (and I mean a lot), and implement the full version's combat system, I'd be down for it.
Good Guy Gone Bad
Member
Square Enix does have some immensely talented developers -- I don't think that's ever been in doubt. The Witcher and FFXV both look good since both are available on the same platforms, which also isn't in doubt.
Neither of those statements contradict the idea that the engine is hard to work with, which is further suggested by the fact that it's only ever been used with this one game, and they're using Unreal Engine now.
Does Square Enix think that it's worth the cost to port the game from Luminous to say, Unreal, and then port the game to the Switch? I suppose only they'd have the answer to that question. The fact that they were able to get decent results out of that engine has nothing to do with how disastrous it's history has been -- The PS3 was a beast to develop for but it ended up being home to some great looking games. Doesn't mean it wasn't a beast to develop for.
WickedLaharl
Member
TwilightPrincess
Member
It runs pretty ok on PS4, now. DQ 11 also runs in 900p/30 and it's getting a Switch version. So i wouldn't say it's impossible.
The pocket version looks like shit. I really hope they make another game, a prequel or sequel, because i have played 15 already and know the story.
@wickedLaharl: Switch is much closer to PS4 than Wii was to PS360.....
Also FF 15 was planned for PS3, called FF Versus 13.
If people believed this could run on PS3, there shouldn't be so much doubt about Switch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyWgRmFXdIM
Xenoblade 2 and BoTW are far from being modern open-world games technically - they're built around the limitations of the Wii U / Switch, and make considerable sacrifices to run at all, even with their evident limitations. Not only is it questionable if Luminous and XV could be adapted for the platform at all, whether the considerable revisions would be realistic from a cost-benefit perspective if possible is uncertain.
Could I trouble you to define these terms, what makes an open-world game "modern" on a "technical" level.
It's not an insult or a complex definition - those games' targets of lower specification, in one case literally last-gen hardware is reflected in the shortcuts and sacrifices made in their development; and as such they can't be pointed to as an example of XV, a game explicitly not built for that environment which already struggles on its current consoles, being easy or even possible to port.
Sorry, I just don't understand. Are you saying that if a game targets lower specifications that it is not a modern open-world game? Wouldn't that make everything on PS4 and XB1 not modern open-world games since even my 5 year old computer outperforms them?
Just wondering if there is some arbitrary line drawn between modern and not modern, and if so, where it is.
Edit: If there is some sort of techniques used in modern open world games, that are unavailable on older hardware, I would like to know about what they are, but to my understanding the basic design approach has remained the same, simply newer games on higher-spec hardware have greater detailed assets and maybe less popin.
there's the question of what's do-able and what's worth it. the game is successful but not on the level of, say, overwatch or rocket league. youre not guaranteed any return on investment tackling that kind of challenge, especially considering the port would be years after the pc version, GOTY and all that
We have not seen the DQXI Switch version yet. There is a lot of speculation which version it will be. The PS4 version downgraded, the 3DS version upgraded or a version build from the ground for Switch?
I think it might be the latter for the fact that they haven't shown it yet and that it doesn't seem to be in a presentable state yet.
I asked this before in this thread, but what was the graphically most demanding game from PS4/Xbox One/PC ported to Switch so far? It might give us an idea of what is possible and what is not.
FFXV certainly is one of the graphically most demanding games out there right now...
Valkerionseven
Member
I'm super taking it as that comment is. "Interested in it" does not confirm or even assume they are trying to do it.
If they do great, I'll be happy when they officially say it. But for now I won't be joining the people hoping on the "its happening" train reading and hearing what they want as opposed to what was said.
If they do great, I'll be happy when they officially say it. But for now I won't be joining the people hoping on the "its happening" train reading and hearing what they want as opposed to what was said.
if it's the pocket version.....why not just announce it today along with the official announcement?
sports games as of now I suppose
We've seen FIFA, don't think we've seen NBA.
then DQ11 if it's the PS4 version.
anyway, If a port is possible, KH3 probably has the highest selling potential of the big 3.
sports games as of now I suppose
We've seen FIFA, don't think we've seen NBA.
then DQ11 if it's the PS4 version.
anyway, If a port is possible, KH3 probably has the highest selling potential of the big 3.
Hibiki Kurosawa
Member
Yeah, but one runs on Unreal and the other runs on Luminous. Porting XV to Switch wouldn't be that simple.
The Hermit
Member
where is Thor: Dark World?
SciencePilot
Member
Came for the poll, but honestly, I don't know which to pick. None of them seem like good options.
The normal game would obviously require tons of changes to work on the Switch. Not sure if they would be willing to compromise that much.
On the other hand, pocket edition seems like it's not good enough on the Switch. The whole point of the Switch is that it offers more premium games than you can get on mobile. I can't imagine anyone wanting this on Switch, so I don't see the point in making it.
A whole new game for the Switch also seems pretty unlikely. Why put out so much effort for a late port?
In the end, I just don't have any hope for this game. I'll continue to look forward to Square Enix's Octopath Traveler, since it was built ground up for the Switch and looks great for what it is. I think bringing unique games like that to the Switch is a far better move for Square Enix than bringing late, weird, gimped ports.
The normal game would obviously require tons of changes to work on the Switch. Not sure if they would be willing to compromise that much.
On the other hand, pocket edition seems like it's not good enough on the Switch. The whole point of the Switch is that it offers more premium games than you can get on mobile. I can't imagine anyone wanting this on Switch, so I don't see the point in making it.
A whole new game for the Switch also seems pretty unlikely. Why put out so much effort for a late port?
In the end, I just don't have any hope for this game. I'll continue to look forward to Square Enix's Octopath Traveler, since it was built ground up for the Switch and looks great for what it is. I think bringing unique games like that to the Switch is a far better move for Square Enix than bringing late, weird, gimped ports.
http://www.4gamer.net/games/075/G007535/20170819005/
Tabata mentioned Nintendo Switch in another interview with 4 gamer.
Tabata mentioned Nintendo Switch in another interview with 4 gamer.
Because it would be easier to go with that version instead of porting the game from hardware that is will beyond the capabilities of the switch which also means they have to port their engine to a different platform. Not to mention all the work that has to be done to get the game running in a state that it's not a catastrophe.
And_Gignac
Member
That doesnt answer the question you quoted, though.
The most probable reason is that a Nintendo Direct is coming.
AlexFlame116
Member
If you think you're the only one who likes x or wants y, chances are you're not.
poodaddy
Member
You're not the only one. No one is ever the only one.
That sounds probable, however a lot of Switch games have been announced the past two days that could've also been shown in the Direct, seems odd to just single this out.
James Scott
Banned
The mobile port doesn't sound like a bad idea if the art wasn't so bad.
Seems like they're lifting animations and VA from the main game but the characters don't move their mouths. Noctis and Prompto seem fine while Cindy and Gladio look terrible
But if it's the mobile port, why not announce it now?
Seems like they're lifting animations and VA from the main game but the characters don't move their mouths. Noctis and Prompto seem fine while Cindy and Gladio look terrible
But if it's the mobile port, why not announce it now?
Hero of Legend
Member
Summary?
foxuzamaki
Doesn't read OPs, especially not his own
does 4gamer design their text to easily translate well into english because I used google translate to translate the page and it is perfectly readable.
KratosEnergyDrink
Member
There is no doubt that FFXV can run on Switch, obviously with some cuts regarding resolution or effects.
Look what even ports like Fifa18, Snake Pass, Minecraft or Lego City look on Switch, most people don't even see the difference to the PS4/X1 versions. Switch very good screen that has better contrast and sharpness than many TVs obviously helps in this regard.
Look what even ports like Fifa18, Snake Pass, Minecraft or Lego City look on Switch, most people don't even see the difference to the PS4/X1 versions. Switch very good screen that has better contrast and sharpness than many TVs obviously helps in this regard.
Dark Cloud
Member
You're not the only one. Plus I forgot who, but someone from the Chrono Trigger dev team at Square is making a game for the Switch. Who knows what it could be.
Joke post?
brickarts295
Member
They'll have to cut a lot corners to put the PS4/XONE version of the game in there.