Support NeoGAF

[Aztechnology]

Too early to call this since we don't know what exactly the full service will be like.

I don't think it's too early to judge based on their past and what we've seen so far
Not to say they can't improve. But development choices will still be affected by it until they prove they aren't dinosaurs when it comes to network and social features.

What I do know however is I'm at the gym playing Mario Cart while I work out. So winning on that end. That being said it really disappoints me that I can't use my Bluetooth headphones with it.

 

[Jubenhimer]

I don't think it's too early to judge based on their past and what we've seen so far
Not to say they can't improve. But development choices will still be affected by it until they prove they aren't dinosaurs when it comes to network and social features.

Well considering the Switch doesn't even have all it's online features yet, I say it's too early. I'm still reserving judgement on this Smartphone app, but if it proves to be a lot better than expected then it could end up being pretty cool. And considering the proposed price ($15-20 per year), it may not be a bad deal. Nintendo's gotten everything else right with the Switch so far, so I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt this time.

 

[spekkeh]

AAA games mostly compete on graphical fidelity of their worlds... and not much else. And seeing as the publishers appear to be all too aware of this, I can see them being reticent to publish anything on at least one more Nintendo generation. It would basically take away all their 1080p60 next-gen engine(r) marketing material. What's left? Same old stuff you played twenty times before? (But without fun Nintendo characters). Nah. Ain't nobody got time for that.

That said, there are some games that I think could still have a market on Switch. For instance, I can't be the only 30+ married with children who decided to categorically skip all Ubisoft open world games because I developed zero tolerance for time wasting during my less than one hour of leisure time a day. I also have more than one hour of commute however, and am much more willing to waste that time. So for games like these, the portability factor adds a lot of value, as long as the rest of the game isn't too compromised, and also not gameplay junk with a nice production value veneer.

 

[Aztechnology]

Well considering the Switch doesn't even have all it's online features yet, I say it's too early. I'm still reserving judgement on this Smartphone app, but if it proves to be a lot better than expected then it could end up being pretty cool. And considering the proposed price ($15-20 per year), it may not be a bad deal. Nintendo's gotten everything else right with the Switch so far, so I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt this time.

Everything right is a pretty damn generous stance. There's WiFi issues, controller connection issues, relatively few games, lack of hardware features and software features that seemingly would be standard nowadays on a console. If we're going to be paying $15-20 for what we're getting now, but with party chat and an occasional NES or SNES port then I'll be disappointed. Because nothing right is worth paying for subscription wise.

 

[Jubenhimer]

Everything right is a pretty damn generous stance. There's WiFi issues, controller connection issues, relatively few games, lack of hardware features and software features that seemingly would be standard nowadays on a console. If we're going to be paying $15-20 for what we're getting now, but with party chat and an occasional NES or SNES port then I'll be disappointed. Because nothing right is worth paying for subscription wise.

The connection issues have mostly been fixed. And additional features can always be added in system updates (and in fact, will be added in future updates as Nintendo alluded to). There have been hiccups sure, but this isn't a Wii U disaster. The Switch conceptually and marketing wise, is a major improvement in almost every aspect.

 

[Milly Osworth]

If Nintendo keeps chugging out great games at the current rate, it wont even need traditional western support.

Especially combined with indies and the support it gets usually for their handhelds like Pokemon, Monster Hunter and so on.

 

[DR2K]

If Nintendo keeps chugging out great games at the current rate, it wont even need traditional western support.

Especially combined with indies and the support it gets usually for their handhelds like Pokemon, Monster Hunter and so on.

1 every 2 months is not a sustainable rate.

 

[MrMephistoX]

Indies yes everything else...no. Just look at the Wii their last blockbuster success third parties got decimated.

 

[Aostia]

If the Switch will be a success (still to be proven) I can see its library shaping up nicyour but in this way

Classic nintendo home games
Classic nintendo portable games
Classic Japanese third party portable games (from both 3ds and vita legacy)
Tons of indie games


Aaaand would be greattach imho

 

[Jumeira]

Not for online games and I don't see Devs putting in effort needed to optimise thier games for portable mode.

It'll get more support though then what we've previously seen, just not expecting 3rd parties to invest thier time to tailor the experience for smaller screen and battery life.

 

[AGoodODST]

Obviously Nintendo's long standing issues are a concern but 3rd parties need to up their game if this is to happen too. It's all very well blaming poor dev tools and Wii U sales but when publishers are releasing Mass Effect 3 for full price when the Trilogy is released on other platforms, or Splintercell missing key features like co-op but sold for the same price. A lot of games on Wii U didn't get DLC like other platforms too. It isn't a situation that fills me as a consumer with confidence.

Let's see how Skyrim and FIFA do. And if they try to pull anything like the above. Though personally I don't see 3rd parties happening in any big way other than Japanese support and indies.

 

[FLAguy954]

With indies? Sure. With AAA? No chance.

.

 

[giapel]

The difference here is portability. It doesn't matter if the ports are graphically inferior. Since they can be played anywhere anytime, there's value added there. unlike the Wii or WiiU where there wasn't any benefit of playing them on the Nintendo console. So while story based games probably still don't make much sense, pickup games like GTA absolutely do.

 

[primasaurus]

Switch's on-the-go gaming says to the market, Yes!

 

[E-phonk]

1 every 2 months is not a sustainable rate.

Nintendo will publish 9 games in the first 9 months on the console. That's one a month, not counting anything they will announce at E3.

 

[ksamedi]

I think it can be succesfull for third parties. I kinda compare it to PC gamers versus console gamers. PC gives you high end grapichs and customization options but is not the most convinient method to play games. Thats why a lot of people prefer console gaming even though it is a lesser experience but good enough for most. The Switch is like the new console compared to PS4 which is like a PC in this comparison. You will have people that find the grapichs good enough and trade that for convinience. I think there is a market for downports to Switch.

 

[SmokedMeat]

big publishers just do remakes and sequels
i want fresh and flexible games on switch

Mario Kart Deluxe is selling gangbusters.

As for the topic I don't expect western publishers to put their best efforts behind Switch. As with Overwatch, I'm not even sure they're willing to devote resources to even get some of these games running on Switch.

I'm still crossing my fingers that we at least get a decent fps series on Switch.

 

[Nev]

Sigh...

No matter how succesful the console is, it will never have Destiny/GTA/RDR/Elder Scrolls VI or whatever, period.

The most it can hope for is some CoD Black Ops Declassified, Skyrim or Silent Hill Book of Memories, as in lesser (or older) titles from big franchises whose main entries are on PC/PS4/Xbox.

That, or Mortal Kombat/Borderlands 2 Vita levels of downgraded ports.

PC gives you high end grapichs and customization options but is not the most convinient method to play games.

Maybe 10 years ago when console games didn't have mandatory day one 20GB updates.

 

[FStubbs]

Indies and Japanese third parties will support it (though FF15 and beyond, and KH3 won't be on Switch).

Western Third Parties? Ubisoft may give it a go and it might get a downported Call of Duty game but that's about it.

It's not about power - it's about the very image of Nintendo itself. The proof is the fact that all of these Western Third parties support mobile - and the Switch is pretty much a high end mobile device in architecture and power.

Red Dead Redemption 2 and games like it will hit Switch when Nintendo is bought out by some other company like Samsung. They'd support the Samsung Switch. To guys like Rockstar, telling them to support Nintendo is like telling them to support Fisher Price.

 

[Hermii]

I thought the GPU in the Nintendo Switch is more modern than in the other consoles, and it's also the fastest mobile chip on the market right now? Am I wrong?

I think its the fastest gpu by a few inches, faaar from the fastest cpu.

 

[Charles Brandon]

I don't think so. Most people that really like those games already have a machine to play them on where they will run a lot better than they do on the Switch. And people that don't really like those sorts of games won't buy them in large quantities. I guess some people may choose the Switch version over the other versions due to portability but not enough to make it worth their while.

 

[marmoka]

Most western big 3rd parties hate Nintendo, so... nope.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Western 3rd parties would have to actually try lol. I have no doubt it can be a solid place to sell Western made games but they have to actually be ported and released. I don't expect much support from the West on the Switch but I will say I am surprised none of the 3rd parties tried to step up and fill any of the gaps at all. Not a single one said "lets invest in a port and be there early".

Baffles my mind honestly.

 

[Wiped89]

It's certainly an interesting proposition.

I haven't got a Switch yet but when I do I'll be interested to see whether I'd prefer to get third party games on Switch for portability or get them on PS4 Pro for 4K HDR on my OLED.

It's a tough one. I think I'd primarily go PS4 as I tend to do most gaming on my TV and I'd have my Switch docked most of the time. But any game that benefits from portability or the ability to play while watching TV, like a strategy game or RPG, I can see myself getting on Switch definitely.

 

[2+2=5]

First of all launch sales aren't a trend but an exception in lifetime sales.

Second why do you think Sony and MS follow the path of the power? Because even if developers don't want to do exclusives they can always do multiplatforms easily, on Switch this isn't possible, AAA games should be exclusives designed for the console or nealy impossible ports.

Wii was a huge success but did you see many third party AAA games? No. Switch won't be any different, big series like Witcher, GTA, COD etc want to impress so they will always try to push the most powerful hardwares.

 

[Mory Dunz]

Fifa has a chance.

Other than that...

 

[AmFreak]

I think its the fastest gpu by a few inches, faaar from the fastest cpu.

In the HH-Mode it's far from the fastest. There are endless phones and tablets with faster gpu's. The price-question is always how fast these devices will stay under load.

 

[Mory Dunz]

Western 3rd parties would have to actually try lol. I have no doubt it can be a solid place to sell Western made games but they have to actually be ported and released. I don't expect much support from the West on the Switch but I will say I am surprised none of the 3rd parties tried to step up and fill any of the gaps at all. Not a single one said "lets invest in a port and be there early".

Baffles my mind honestly.

Lego city will get another port for switch U in 2023.

 

[v1oz]

I'm hoping Skyrim on Switch is a success (and I truly believe it shall be so) for that may cause the Western giants to consider giving the platform more serious support.

Is that even a thing? Who wants such a late port anyway.

 

[Winthorpe]

My hope is that, when Western developers see the sales numbers, even though they can't develop new AAA titles for the machine, we see things like Bioshock Collection, Mass Effect, Borderlands etc make an appearance.

So Xbox 360 / PS3 games, spruced up and made portable.

Would be amazing.

 

[Hyun Sai]

Maybe 10 years ago when console games didn't have mandatory day one 20GB updates.

Nah, still very true. It's just waiting time, no effort needed to make anything working. That's one of the reasons consoles sell, the simplicity of use is still miles ahead of PC for the mass market.

 

[KageMaru]

Western 3rd parties would have to actually try lol. I have no doubt it can be a solid place to sell Western made games but they have to actually be ported and released. I don't expect much support from the West on the Switch but I will say I am surprised none of the 3rd parties tried to step up and fill any of the gaps at all. Not a single one said "lets invest in a port and be there early".

Baffles my mind honestly.

Considering how Nintendo has had a complete disregard for developer requests/wishes in the past, it shouldn't be too baffling that we're seeing the current situation.

Cost is surely a major factor as well. Sure it can probably be said that porting to the Switch would be easier in ways, that still doesn't mean it would be easy or even possible. There is also less reason to invest if a game would cost more to port to the Switch, due to the extra effort needed to get it to run properly, while likely selling less. If we're seeing reports that a game like Overwatch can't be ported without major sacrifices, I wouldn't hold my breath for other demanding games either.

Though I would like to see how games like Witcher 3, CoDWWII, and BF1 would translate to the Switch from a technology standpoint. I'd imagine each game would be horribly downgraded but it would be interesting to see how the developers tried to get around the platform's limitations.

 

[Dee Dah Dave]

Nah it's not powerful enough to get the big AAA games. But it should get some, providing it sells well. So overall an improvement over the Wii U but nothing spectacular.

 

[notaskwid]

Darksiders 3 just got leaked and no Switch in sight.

 

[requiem02]

Is that even a thing? Who wants such a late port anyway.

Anyone who wants to slay dragons and join the Thieves Guild while on the toilet. Don't pretend that prospect doesn't intrigue you.

 

[Skittzo0413]

I put down my "pro's" for western AAA support earlier in the thread but a few people have listed some good and important cons too:

1) Storage space. Developers will have to greatly compress their games if they want to be able to sell them digitally. There should be no reason why Switch game cards can't be 64GB (or even larger) but a lot of modern games can be larger than that, not to mention their patches/updates. The Switch's storage is a big problem there, as while it's expandable quite easily, developers can't assume every owner will have access to unlimited storage expansion. So they'll have to heavily compress not only the games but the patches and updates

2) Online service. This is more of an unknown because we don't have any information on how it will work once it's paid, but as of now it lacks features compared to the competition. This also plays into the storage space issues, since online games (like Overwatch) get regular patches which would wind up filling up Switch storage space quite quickly.

I think at E3 we'll get a better idea of how the online service works. Also, I doubt this will happen, but it would be REALLY nice if Nintendo came up with some storage solution for the Switch beyond a microSD card. Something like a wireless hard drive which plugs into the dock so that you can either transfer files while docked or while undocked but still in the house. Obviously you wouldn't be able to play games off of this storage device but it would still help alleviate some of that concern.

 

[Malice215]

I wouldn't expect much from Western 3rd parties besides minimal effort and porting last gen games over to the Switch because publishers are focused on making the most money possible and choose to focus on PS4/Xbox/PC.

 

[KageMaru]

Is that even a thing? Who wants such a late port anyway.

Plenty of people wanted the game on the PS4/XBO, I don't see why the same couldn't be said for the Switch. Zelda has proven that there's a market for open world fantasy games on the platform.

Nah it's not powerful enough to get the big AAA games. But it should get some, providing it sells well. So overall an improvement over the Wii U but nothing spectacular.

I think we'll see games with mostly controlled environments like sports games or puzzlers like Snake Pass. If a developer has more control over the rendering frame by frame, I think it would be easier to port.

I put down my "pro's" for western AAA support earlier in the thread but a few people have listed some good and important cons too:

1) Storage space. Developers will have to greatly compress their games if they want to be able to sell them digitally. There should be no reason why Switch game cards can't be 64GB (or even larger) but a lot of modern games can be larger than that, not to mention their patches/updates. The Switch's storage is a big problem there, as while it's expandable quite easily, developers can't assume every owner will have access to unlimited storage expansion. So they'll have to heavily compress not only the games but the patches and updates

2) Online service. This is more of an unknown because we don't have any information on how it will work once it's paid, but as of now it lacks features compared to the competition. This also plays into the storage space issues, since online games (like Overwatch) get regular patches which would wind up filling up Switch storage space quite quickly.

I think at E3 we'll get a better idea of how the online service works. Also, I doubt this will happen, but it would be REALLY nice if Nintendo came up with some storage solution for the Switch beyond a microSD card. Something like a wireless hard drive which plugs into the dock so that you can either transfer files while docked or while undocked but still in the house. Obviously you wouldn't be able to play games off of this storage device but it would still help alleviate some of that concern.

You're forgetting performance as an important con.

 

[Skittzo0413]

You're forgetting performance as an important con.

Because it's not. Any PS4 game can run on a Switch with enough downgrades, and development/porting is reportedly quite easy. The majority of people interested in a portable version will have no issues with downgraded visuals, so power really shouldn't matter whatsoever.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Darksiders 3 just got leaked and no Switch in sight.

Has there been a single western AAA announcement with a mention of a Switch version?

 

[m00h]

Is that even a thing? Who wants such a late port anyway.

I do. I'd prefer having Witcher 2 (or even better 3) on the go, but Skyrim is fine too. I'm quite convenient that Skyrim will be a success on the Switch.

 

[Quasar]

I certainly wish it could. It seems like technically it should be fine. At least for a subset of major western titles.

I kind of of expect western publishers to do things like the WiiU ME3 rather than current games though. An then when they dont do well enough it will be a green light to not make current games on Switch.

 

[KageMaru]

Because it's not. Any PS4 game can run on a Switch with enough downgrades, and development/porting is reportedly quite easy. The majority of people interested in a portable version will have no issues with downgraded visuals, so power really shouldn't matter whatsoever.

I can see that maybe being the case if devs only had to worry about the docked performance but they also have the handheld mode to consider. If what you say were true, we wouldn't be having comments like we did about Overwatch on the system. The word "easy" is relative in this instance and I'm sure not a single developer would use that word when discussing porting to the Switch.

 

[jon bones]

i think it'll get AAA western games for sure: GTA V & Injustice 2 seem highly likely to me.


won't get day and date games like Prey - but that's what high end PCs are for

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Lego city will get another port for switch U in 2023.

Lmao. Lego City seemed to have done okay on the Switch actually. But yeah.

Considering how Nintendo has had a complete disregard for developer requests/wishes in the past, it shouldn't be too baffling that we're seeing the current situation.

Naw. I mean I will be the first to say Nintendo sucks ass with their hardware for over a decade but the concept of the Switch is that its a handheld and a console and its portable form factor is stronger than any last generation system. If 3rd parties weren't going to port anything recent (which they most likey could if they wanted to) there is still a lot of games they could have used to atlwast build a presence.

Cost is surely a major factor as well. Sure it can probably be said that porting to the Switch would be easier in ways, that still doesn't mean it would be easy or even possible. There is also less reason to invest if a game would cost more to port to the Switch, due to the extra effort needed to get it to run properly, while likely selling less. If we're seeing reports that a game like Overwatch can't be ported without major sacrifices, I wouldn't hold my breath for other demanding games either.

The entirety of my point is you gotta take a risk and an investment to see benefits. Maybe it doesn't pan out but the cost of porting some sort of title to a console launch generally has a low bar for break even. The fact literally no one tried is what I find shocking. Not that I think EA is going to post up or anything but Activision or Ubi not trying at all with no signs of investment is strange to me. As far as how the games would run, the graphical hit isn't going to be as huge a deal because the masses are not expecting a PS4 or Xbox 1 on a system a little bigger than a GPS.

Though I would like to see how games like Witcher 3, CoDWWII, and BF1 would translate to the Switch from a technology standpoint. I'd imagine each game would be horribly downgraded but it would be interesting to see how the developers tried to get around the platform's limitations.

I dunno, games are a lot more scalable these days. There will be some pretty obvious downgrades but having a recent game available is better than having nothing.

 

[Papo Swing]

Unless it is some super duper success I doubt it and I blame the 3rd parties. They only want the easy money so they will not risk making a Switch game unless it already has a huge install base.

 

[Skittzo0413]

I can see that maybe being the case if devs only had to worry about the docked performance but they also have the handheld mode to consider. If what you say were true, we wouldn't be having comments like we did about Overwatch on the system. The word "easy" is relative in this instance and I'm sure not a single developer would use that word when discussing porting to the Switch.

The Overwatch comments had more to do with continual updates for an online game from what I recall, which is what I addressed as being a bigger issue. Even in portable mode the Switch is a decent bit stronger than some low end PCs which play Overwatch perfectly fine, with zero optimizations.

I'd bet that Blizzard hasn't even touched a Switch devkit so they wouldn't know how hypothetical Switch port would perform, and with good reason due to the storage and online limitations as I mentioned above.

 

[MisterR]

Am I looking into the past? The reads like a post from 2007.

and yet it is still completely accurate today.

 

[Firenze1]

The problem is that western devs like hardware power.

 

[MisterR]

I put down my "pro's" for western AAA support earlier in the thread but a few people have listed some good and important cons too:

1) Storage space. Developers will have to greatly compress their games if they want to be able to sell them digitally. There should be no reason why Switch game cards can't be 64GB (or even larger) but a lot of modern games can be larger than that, not to mention their patches/updates. The Switch's storage is a big problem there, as while it's expandable quite easily, developers can't assume every owner will have access to unlimited storage expansion. So they'll have to heavily compress not only the games but the patches and updates

2) Online service. This is more of an unknown because we don't have any information on how it will work once it's paid, but as of now it lacks features compared to the competition. This also plays into the storage space issues, since online games (like Overwatch) get regular patches which would wind up filling up Switch storage space quite quickly.

I think at E3 we'll get a better idea of how the online service works. Also, I doubt this will happen, but it would be REALLY nice if Nintendo came up with some storage solution for the Switch beyond a microSD card. Something like a wireless hard drive which plugs into the dock so that you can either transfer files while docked or while undocked but still in the house. Obviously you wouldn't be able to play games off of this storage device but it would still help alleviate some of that concern.

These are way bigger problems than the power differential in my mind.