That is a solid port?
Snake Pass is, but many people aren't happy with the sub native stuff, and I assumed (incorrectly) that the user might be saying Rime will suffer the same.
Seems he has "sources" but still, Tantalus have done well before.
That is a solid port?
Just things I've heard. I guess we'll see, eh?
I'll be grabbing it on PS4, not Switch.
Heard from who?
In all fairness, the PS4 port also runs at a pretty low resolution. So there's that.Snake Pass is, but many people aren't happy with the sub native stuff, and I assumed (incorrectly) that the user might be saying Rime will suffer the same.
Seems he has "sources" but still, Tantalus have done well before.
Just things I've heard. I guess we'll see, eh?
I'll be grabbing it on PS4, not Switch.
Is this a serious question?
I think he wants to know if you heard it from some random user on a forum or from a person who would indeed know something about the Switch version.
Well if it were some random user on a forum, I wouldn't have said anything.
That's the last I'll say about it. I don't expect good things, and I'll be skipping the Switch version.
The problem with this is you can say this and it's so vague that as long as their is some sort of downgrade you can defend your position that it was worth skipping in favor of the PS4 version. You could be a bit more specific without giving much away. Are you talking about framerate, resolution, bugs, all of the above, etc...?
Just FYI
https://gamersplash.com/2017/05/08/...fering-fps-issues-may-be-pushed-back-further/
Sounds like something optimisation and dev time could potentially assist with.
Framerate.
Is this a serious question?
Just FYI
https://gamersplash.com/2017/05/08/...fering-fps-issues-may-be-pushed-back-further/
Sounds like something optimisation and dev time could potentially assist with.
Before people say "LOL 10k", he's accurate on this 100%.
It's just hard to believe given the existence of $20 games. We then have to believe that larger game cards result in $10+ more costs than smaller ones, which seems weird given everything is 32 GB or below. Like, Nintendo went to their engineers and said "Design us the least efficient read-only storage media possible in the modern world!"This is quite noteworthy though, as some doubted that going physical on Switch is more expensive than on other platforms:
"On the physical side, we cant lower the price without selling at a loss"
Before people say "LOL 10k", he's accurate on this 100%.
Before people say "LOL 10k", he's accurate on this 100%.
Okay that change is acceptable. Digital being the same price as the other versions with the retail having something else included. I had no problem with the higher retail cost for Puyo Puyo Tetris becauseof the keychains. I actually use them and like them. A high quality download of the OST is good.
However it does goes to show in the end the original excuse wasn't true. When shit like this happens again people need to continue to speak up. That's for everything though.
Well, I think the most interesting fact that comes out of this is an (indirect) confirmation that there is actually no policy being enforced by Nintendo regarding the price of digital VS physical releases, like Eurogamer was claiming.
Just FYI
https://gamersplash.com/2017/05/08/...fering-fps-issues-may-be-pushed-back-further/
Sounds like something optimisation and dev time could potentially assist with.
So, someone brought that to my attention a few days ago. I will tell you that we are still on track for Q3.
Good on them. This is exactly what they should do in these situations, keep parity with digital and throw up some cheap goodies to make the physical better value.
If that article is accurate they should drop the Resolution to 540p/900p if it's currently 720p/1080p.
It apparently hits 30 indoors so maybe just use dynamic resolution
Yeah if they can implement it easily enough.
Is it something typically hard to do?
It's just hard to believe given the existence of $20 games. We then have to believe that larger game cards result in $10+ more costs than smaller ones, which seems weird given everything is 32 GB or below. Like, Nintendo went to their engineers and said "Design us the least efficient read-only storage media possible in the modern world!"
So, someone brought that to my attention a few days ago. I will tell you that we are still on track for Q3.
That's not how it works. You assume that the higher price is just due to higher production costs. In reality, when publishers need to invest more capital, they also expect a higher return (i.e. the return on capital investment in % remains constant), in your example the return as a percentage of capital investment would decrease. Similarly, retailers expect a higher margin: based on your idea of how it works, they would sell an item for 10000 EUR with the same profit as an item for 1 EUR.
With taxes, publisher margins, retail margins, and distributor margins having an additional base cost of 5 EUR will almost be 10 EUR for the customer.
Nobody argues that the cards are 10 EUR more expensive than discs.
There are rumours that the port is not just handled by Tantalus? Can you give and information on that?
What I was trying to get at is if any card game can be sold for $20 and not be at a loss, then the price difference for some larger card must be significantly higher if $40 is the first viable price where it is not losing money. So even if extra retailer cut and such things were a full 50%, then it would be a case of $10 extra for the manufacturing and $10 extra for the rest.That's not how it works. You assume that the higher price is just due to higher production costs. In reality, when publishers need to invest more capital, they also expect a higher return (i.e. the return on capital investment in % remains constant), in your example the return as a percentage of capital investment would decrease. Similarly, retailers expect a higher margin: based on your idea of how it works, they would sell an item for 10000 EUR with the same profit as an item for 1 EUR.
With taxes, publisher margins, retail margins, and distributor margins having an additional base cost of 5 EUR will almost be 10 EUR for the customer.
Nobody argues that the cards are 10 EUR more expensive than discs.
What I was trying to get at is if any card game can be sold for $20 and not be at a loss, then the price difference for some larger card must be significantly higher if $40 is the first viable price where it is not losing money. So even if extra retailer cut and such things were a full 50%, then it would be a case of $10 extra for the manufacturing and $10 extra for the rest.
But the simplest explanation is that they did not literally mean that a $30 or $35 price would be losing money on every single sale, just that it would make the money earned unattractive versus the costs.
What do you mean your zelda cart isn't coated in gold leaf.Not every game has the same development costs. A game such as Zelda costs 70 EUR, Sine Mora Ex costs 20 EUR. Yet nobody would argue that the card of Zelda costs 50 EUR more than that of Sine Mora Ex.