LordRaptor
Member
You mean - in the spirit of the article - perhaps they wont fix it because REVII_ might not be coming to switch possibly because it might not be able to run it
-
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.
Forbes: Why It Matters 'Resident Evil 7' Isn't Coming To The Nintendo Switch Either
- Thread starter Darklor01
- Start date
You mean - in the spirit of the article - perhaps they wont fix it because REVII_ might not be coming to switch possibly because it might not be able to run it
AcademicSaucer
Member
The switch is not going to get the home console third parties, but it will still succeed if it gets the 3DS third parties.
Yes though!!! Gamecube was the last Nintendo console I owned and among other reasons that was because it competed in power with the others and still had a more then decent amount of 3rd party games I enjoyed, alongside several of their own games.
Which prolly puts ya in a small small minority. Not everyone that likes Nintendo games likes every Nintendo game. I gots no interest in Zelda or Splatoon so right from the start the systems kind of a graveyard to me. An they can't possibly produce enough games a year for everyone who's not blindly in love with every franchise they put out.
boiled goose
good with gravy
There are good and bad ways to do late ports.
Re7 would not really be a late port. Why not just release upcoming future entries then?
Good ports could be mass effect collection ( instead of super late me3 lol ea). Dark souls collection. Or Bayonetta 1 included with Bayonetta 2. There are right ways to do it
This is not about gamers deserving games. I do think publishers are leaving easy money on the table.
Things like mainline sports, Classic franchises, and party games like rock band should release on Nintendo consoles.
It lends me to believe there are other factors affecting the decision making.
Serenitynow
Member
What information leads you to that conclusion?
Hypothetical: A separate Switch dock is currently $90, right? At some point in the future, Nintendo could cut the dock out of the package and sell a $199 handheld. But I'm pretty sure it'll get even cheaper than that. You see, Switch is currently sold at a profit, but if Nintendo was in dire straights, they could theoretically cut the price to $250. That's with the dock. A handheld only SKU would become $150. That's cheaper than the 3DS was for most of it's life. Assuming the Switch gets Pokemon games (the major hardware drivers of Nintendo's handheld), it is reasonable to assume a large portion of that audience would carry over.
The point is, everyone is taking the information we have about the Switch at launch and applying it to the rest of the system's life. Which is just crazy to me.
evilromero
Member
I kind of wish the Switch was more like the Wii U after sitting on my thoughts. In our household we use the dual screen functionality all the time. It's probably the most convenient gaming console hardware we have (also have PS4). When I told my wife that the Switch can't really do the stuff we commonly do on the Wii U she was surprised. No, we can't use the control pad to browse Netflix, the menu, etc while feeding the baby or whatever. We have to physically put the thing in the dock. So basically will be like using a traditional console I suppose. Just disappointed cause that thing fit our domestic routine to the T.
bobbychalkers
Member
This, of course Nintendo needs 3rd parties to succeed but it doesn't necessarily need the same 3rd party offerings as the PS4 and Xbox. Switch can't compete with them on this front and it was never meant to. People who want to play those types of games likely have options (multiple in my case) to play them if they wanted to. They can however try to replicate what the Wii did in terms of 3rd parties and by that I mean getting a nice library of games that are tailor made or retrofitted to utilize the system's mechanics.
BlastProcessing
Member
It's the quality of the contributors that's the problem. They are a clickbait farm that too often still gets the shine of credibility form their name. Video game freelancers have to answer to editors because at the end of the day, it's the credibility of the entire publication on the line.
The marching orders that Forbes gives to their contributors is pretty obvious. Stir shit and get clicks.
Darklor01
Might need to stop sniffing glue
I just think that the console can do Resident Evil and third party games including console style since it is, according to Nintendo, a console. I find the article is trashing the console as if there was an agenda behind it.
I think game many larger game companies will develop for the system they feel will earn them enough money for the development to be worth it. For some that are on the fence, maybe hire a company to port an existing older title to a platform. I think there have to be adopters enough for the attachment to be made, though, I'm not sure which is the chicken and which is the egg.
I think game many larger game companies will develop for the system they feel will earn them enough money for the development to be worth it. For some that are on the fence, maybe hire a company to port an existing older title to a platform. I think there have to be adopters enough for the attachment to be made, though, I'm not sure which is the chicken and which is the egg.
Justin Bailey
------ ------
I don't get it either. It's a thread about an article. BFD. If the article sucks then it sucks, but no need to demand no one should be allowed to make a thread about it.
staticneuron
Member
Same here and I agree. I am going to buy a switch. I agree with all the faults people say it has. But I am still making that informed purchase. I am going to treat it like a handheld with a dock, not a dedicated console. It's simply because.... the switch is a handheld with a dock. Jumping through hoops to try to pretend that at that pricepoint it is a competitive home console is illogical.
But if it gets enough sales and attention, third parties will be enticed to create titles for it. Those titles just need to sell for more attention to be brought to it. It is a weird cycle that involves faith on the part of third party first and a honest step forward.
Just being a "console" doesn't mean something will run well. The gamecube is a console, do you think it will run RE7 as it is designed currently well? Of course not, there is power to contend with. The Switch is an ARM SOC. Stating numbers become tricky given the architecture. People seem to forgot what happened with the Wii U as well.
DeuceGamer
Member
Yea, I don't think RE7 missing Switch is a big deal since Switch isn't even out. We saw how late ports performed on Wii U and I don't see any reason to think RE7 would be any different.
Peter Ian Staker
Member
Well sounds like they brought it up in the right place.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
Having 3 big game series is better for "survival" than having 1. The console with the most games is typically the sales winner in the end after all.
Missing out on 3rd party games means a narrowing of demographics interested in the platform, as Nintendo can only accommodate the taste of so many people as a single publisher. Narrow demographics = less game variety, lower overall sales, and less risks taken by big developers. If you sell 10 million copies of Pokemon but only 20 million units overall, that's just not a healthy environment for a wide variety of games. It means that Nintendo is only selling to their diehard fans...which is what we saw with the Wii U. 15 million in sales is enough for Nintendo to keep eking out hardware a few games a year, and I suppose if you only like Nintendo games that's enough. But most of the market wants more, and it's Nintendo's job to entice more.
Late ports selling poorly is not even close to a universal phenomenon. How do you explain Minecraft sales on Wii U and Vita? Dark Souls and GTA5 sales on PC? Rocket League on Xbox One? Mario Maker on 3DS?
If the game is good and the interest is there, people will buy it whenever they get a chance.
Chaos2Frozen
Member
...You guys don't get paid 0_0 ?
ronaldthump
Member
its releasing not far outside the RE7 launch window. 2 months. They have no plan to release it, they have no desire to release it. We can guess why.
- The game isn't for the audience.
- They have no confidence in sales
- Specs
- Not interested
- Ultimately the decision comes from the higher ups at Capcom
If there's money to be made, they'll do a port. If they don't see money, they won't.
What is with the poo pooing of the topic anyhow. Why not weigh in instead of saying "forbes contributor".
ArkkAngel007
Member
I'm not sure of the point when the other thread based off the very same statement by Capcom is still frequently jumping to the front page, but I agree that there isn't much of a point expecting these things to happen. The 3rd party portion of the industry isn't the same as back in the Wii days to be able to sustain a ton of throwaway titles and ports with little expectation of a turnaround.
I don't see a Problem with RE7 not being on switch. It can't run it.
the problem would be Switch not receiveing ANY Resident Evil game at all.
if the Switch sells, I'd expect Capcom to do a RE tailored to the console, but knowing them they'd pull some low.budget, B-team, "chronicles" crap, so yeah fuck third parties for not acknowleding nintendo when they deliver on the hardware sales.
the problem would be Switch not receiveing ANY Resident Evil game at all.
if the Switch sells, I'd expect Capcom to do a RE tailored to the console, but knowing them they'd pull some low.budget, B-team, "chronicles" crap, so yeah fuck third parties for not acknowleding nintendo when they deliver on the hardware sales.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Afaik, Forbes' games articles are always from contributors. Maybe even all of their opinion articles are, but I'm not sure.
Arc Christelle
Member
Off topic. I really wish people would stop exaggerating on all the third party "love" the GameCube got. I recall not having access to a shit ton of games that were either exclusive to the PS2 or both Xbox/PS2, despite being more powerful and those discs not being as much of a weakness as most people try to make it out to be. And then when they got a hold to any decent third party exclusive, a month-year later a downgraded port was often passed to the PS2 or the PS2 itself held back Gamecube's development with multiplats.
Third Parties didn't care about N64, GCN, Half-assed the Wii, and Ignored the Wii U. At this point you can't possibly be buying a Nintendo console for third parties. There are third party games that sold the most in their franchise history on GCN and Wii and legacy entries are now on everything but Nintendo. At this point I don't expect third parties to support Nintendo. I understand the importance, but the reality says they won't.
I don't think they can tbh. Everyone's talking about hardware but the big issue Nintendo fears is being in a Gamecube situation and taking losses only to not receive the support the console needs and underwhelm.
======================
Developing the Switch itself is still a brilliant move imo, especially when it comes to support but that's for another thread.
Is there an official statement about this?
Adding switch support to RE7 would have either delayed the release, or resulted in the switch version coming out 6 months after the other versions. Which will sell bad especially given that by that point the other console versions will be like $30.
The issue is if there is no RE support in the future, be it RE8 or RE Revelations 3.
This article is daft.
The issue is if there is no RE support in the future, be it RE8 or RE Revelations 3.
This article is daft.
n0razi
Member
Thats not what Reggie says though
Jawmuncher
Member
Only reason Re needs to be on switch is to give nintendo more incentive to put an RE character into Smash.
royox
Member
Reggie keeps calling it a home console with portability.
Devilgunman
Member
Which Monster Hunter is coming to the Switch?
I'm honestly baffled that the only deconfirmed ports that make news for the Switch are from clearly graphically demanding games that the thing wouldn't be able to run without a bunch of compromises.
This is like lamenting the lack of an Uncharted 4 port lmao (let's pretend it's third party for a sec).
Nintendo needs as much third party support as possible, that's for sure, but let's be realistic in what we expect to be ported.
This is like lamenting the lack of an Uncharted 4 port lmao (let's pretend it's third party for a sec).
Nintendo needs as much third party support as possible, that's for sure, but let's be realistic in what we expect to be ported.
Are people really arguing that Nintendo don't need 3rd party support and that people buy their hardware to play Nintendo games?
Didn't people say the same when Wii u launched?
Yeah people buy Nintendo hardware to play first party titles, the problem is that the wii u showed us there were only 12 million of those people.
Nintendo needs 3rd party support. Will 3ds devs help with that? Possibly, but keep in mind that 3ds titles are significantly cheaper to produce, I think you'll see a few major 3ds devs come over to switch, but the games will take longer to make and cost more to develop.
Didn't people say the same when Wii u launched?
Yeah people buy Nintendo hardware to play first party titles, the problem is that the wii u showed us there were only 12 million of those people.
Nintendo needs 3rd party support. Will 3ds devs help with that? Possibly, but keep in mind that 3ds titles are significantly cheaper to produce, I think you'll see a few major 3ds devs come over to switch, but the games will take longer to make and cost more to develop.
Tavernacle12
Member
If the Switch is genuinely successful (like, full-on healthy with consistent sales) games that it is possible to play on Switch with a bit of a downgrade will show up on Switch. Obviously, not every multi platform game is going to be viable, but if the Switch is successful third parties will make the effort to develop for it. Something like Resident Evil 7 doesn't make sense for the Switch anyways, as it's releasing right before and if Skyrim isn't gonna be ready until the fall there's no way they were going to be able to get this ready soon either.
The best case scenerio is it's like the Wii, where certain games had different versions made for Nintendo hardware as they went multiplatform, however since the difference between Switch and PS4/XBone are lesser than Wii/360, these games will likely not suck as much and sell better.
The best case scenerio is it's like the Wii, where certain games had different versions made for Nintendo hardware as they went multiplatform, however since the difference between Switch and PS4/XBone are lesser than Wii/360, these games will likely not suck as much and sell better.
Tavernacle12
Member
The games will certainly cost some amount more to develop, but something like, say, Phoenix Wright or Professor Layton don't need a huge boost in graphics to be home console ready. It's going to vary series to series.
Didn't know this. I always disliked the obsessive hatred for contributor articles on GAF, but if this is the case then I'm slightly more skeptical now.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
I would expect Capcom to have Switch devkits way earlier then that and seems like they do since SFII is coming out.
TLZ
Banned
Maybe you weren't paying attention when Reggie said why 3rd party didn't work for Wii u and it will this time, because Nintendo will make it work?
I've been justifiably hard on the Switch's specs but I actually think it could run a pared-back but not rebuilt version of RE7 if Capcom choose to do so. The fact that it runs as well as it does on a 10+ year old Core2Duo tells suggests the engine scales very well.
Point being this has more to do in my opinion with Capcom's faith in Nintendo and the Switch's market than it has to do with the specs.
Point being this has more to do in my opinion with Capcom's faith in Nintendo and the Switch's market than it has to do with the specs.
I should've clarified; Im referring to traditional RE games. Mercenaries was more like an action spinoff. Revelations launched several months after the 3ds launched(just shy of a year, in each region). Similar case with Unbrella Chronicles on Wii. Capcom had a quickly growing base to work with by the time those games launched, and the franchise's reception from Nintendo system owners had boosted their confidence to begin development early on. After the Wii U, however, I'm not surprised if they prefer to take a slight wait-and-see approach.
Astral Dog
Member
It will get Resident Evil 6 portable instead
Sora the Cat
Member
Of course Switch can run RE7. Anyone who played it on PC with an old rig should know this. Probably at 720p and 30fps with the proper settings.
Remember that Switch has way more power than WiiU and WiiU was already better than PS360.
There was no reason for RE7 being on Switch at this point tho and I don't know anyone who expected that game. Don't give more clicks to this thing.
Remember that Switch has way more power than WiiU and WiiU was already better than PS360.
There was no reason for RE7 being on Switch at this point tho and I don't know anyone who expected that game. Don't give more clicks to this thing.
Astral Dog
Member
The Switch can't handle that much horror goodness
Yeah but I'd also say that Phoenix Wright and Professor Layton aren't huge system sellers that are going to get consumers to fork over another 300+ dollars in an already crowded living room.
Mister Wolf
Gold Member
Would rather play Zelda and Xenoblade 2 anyway. I have my PC for resident evil 7. Switch's main selling point for me is Nintendo exclusives and portability with power I cannon get anywhere else.
pixelation
Member
Nintendo die hard fanbase's defense, 3rd party support DOES matter. Tell me with a straight face that having the newest COD, GTA and RE games wouldn't make a difference?, it sure as hell would. It would mean that some folks could just have it be their sole console this gen. But as it is... they can't because Switch won't be able to run games w/o making changes/compromising or heavily optimizing for whatever current gen title is in question. It DOES matter, so the Nintendo faithful can try and downplay 3rd party support all they want... but Wii U's fate would've been far better with decent 3rd party support and Switch's destiny is also dependant on 3rd party support or lack thereof.
A port of street fighter 2 looks more like a consolation price.
On topic, I dont mind having the switch as a 2nd or 3rd console but not for the asking price. As i know the library wont be comparable to other platforms.
This is me. I generally don't play too many Nintendo games, so Mario and Zelda don't matter to me at all. However, I'm always open to third party games and even though there aren't a whole lot of them coming, I'm really into RPGs, so I'll have stuff to pay day 1 since I Am Setsuna is coming out! I'll also be picking up Disgaea 5 as well when it's released. I'm not so rigid in that I can't look at other things coming. I won't be hurting for games to play on the NS in the first year.
Would I like for some of the big third party games to get announced? Yes. I would have picked up Tekken 7. I still want FF XV on the NS as well. If they happen, I'll be there day one. If I REALLY want to play those games I can pick them up for my PS4. I'm not too upset about it, to be honest.
Though, I do think people need to keep that same Wii U perspective with the NS. Most of the big games probably aren't coming and we'll hear a lot of "We have no plans for the Switch at this time." I don't think it'll matter whether the system is a success or not. I'm come to terms with this and I'm fine with it.
everthustodeadbeats
Member
This. They can get 3rd party exclusives if it works out, but forget about ports. Nintendo doesn't care about matching MS or Sony for specs. 3rd party support be damned.
Similar threads
- Poll