• 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.

Nintendo Switch Tech Limitations Won’t Allow It To Run Call Of Duty, Believes The CMA

IbizaPocholo

NeoGAFs Kent Brockman

The CMA documents have revealed that the regulator doesn’t believe Nintendo Switch will be able to run Call of Duty. Granted, the agreement between Nintendo and Microsoft is legally binding, but the platform’s technical problems make the FPS title’s arrival on it uncertain.

The CMA also believes that even if problems are overcome, the experience will differ from PlayStation and Xbox consoles. In addition, the regulator also uncovered that Activision wanted to develop Call of Duty for the console in the past.

However, it did not succeed in accomplishing this task because of storage capacity problems on Nintendo Switch. We also get hints about additional work and other technical issues coming up in this port in redacted sentences.

Nintendo Switch limitations CMA


The UK regulator actually believes that the Nintendo Switch will not be able to offer Call of Duty to customers.

It went on to explain that relative to Xbox and PlayStation, the console doesn’t have the same catalog of “graphically intensive” titles. For sure, there are exceptions like Fortnite and Apex Legends, but it tames in comparison to its competitors.

Hence, the CMA believes it may not be capable to offer the graphically intensive multiplayer experience of Call of Duty. Even if the franchise does come to Nintendo Switch, the experience won’t be similar to other consoles. Details like storage, graphics, and framerate will differ a lot due to the console’s technical limitations.

Furthermore, even though Microsoft’s deal with Nintendo is “legally binding“, it doesn’t certify Call of Duty will arrive on the platform. As per the CMA, the reason for this is the hardware limitations compared to PlayStation and Xbox. Even if no issues come up regarding the nature of the deal, these issues will need fixing.

Nintendo Switch Microsoft deal CMA


Hence, you can’t tell how much the Call of Duty experience will differ on the console. Due to all this, the CMA is unable to place material weight on Microsoft’s ability to bring the FPS series to the Switch.

In addition, Activision has already tried to port Call of Duty to the console and failed. The regulator uncovers on page 94 that as per Activision’s internal documents, the company thought about developing the FPS for Nintendo Switch. But, it didn’t succeed because of storage issues arising due to the console’s technical problems.

The documents redacted the space Call of Duty would need on the Nintendo Switch. But, telling by the context, it would be more than the 125-175GB on console and PC. Furthermore, another Activision document has redacted statements about additional work and the technical issues regarding this port.

Nintendo Switch Activision CMA
 
This always seemed to me like a way for MS to try and get the deal approved without really having the technical authority to truly claim they can make CoD on Switch in a compelling way.

I mean, I'm sure at some level it is possible. But at what cost? Significant dev time spent downporting and ultimately not making Switch owners all that happy with what they're getting for the end product anyways.

This is what has happened in the past and I don't really see any reason for that to be different today. So when Activision developers hear Microsoft making these sorts of claims - I wonder if they're just rolling their eyes at what they're going to be forced into.
 
Last edited:
I don't think anyone was seriously thinking that ATVI would just copy and paste the exact version of CoD for current gen consoles and PC right onto Switch. Of course it would have to be a heavily reduced product, probably based on the last-gen versions but with extremely lower quality assets because nobody is going to try and download a 150 GB game from the Nintendo eShop and there aren't any cartridges that can store 150 GB either. I think the largest Switch game cart tops out at 64 GB of capacity.

Even at 64 GB of capacity, I would think most Switch owners aren't walking around with 256 GB or larger SD cards and ATVI would be really pushing to get the Switch version of CoD under 20 GB so it's actually feasible to download from the eShop and store on a relatively small SD card. I would imagine Switch would have to separate CoD's single player campaign and online multiplayer + Warzone clients into 2 separate downloads, so you can play through the single player campaign if you wanted and then delete it and that would also save on storage capacity requirements.

This is all highly theoretical, the deal probably isn't going to go through anyways.
 
Last edited:

Saber

Gold Member
I aways though there are reasons for why Activision didn't brought CoD to Switch, even though they aways had in the past with Wii, DS and 3DS.

I bet they just want their main game ported but giving the nature of Switch and their games acting as GaaS(meaning constant updates and huge space consuming), they probably think its too much of hassle just to put there, even though they are the types to throw CoD everywhere.
 
I’m as cynical about this as anyone but this just proves these people don’t even know what they’re looking at. Obviously MS intends cloud support not running locally off the hardware.
Extremely unlikely for a CoD game, imagine trying to play CoD with all that cloud gaming lag.

WB and Avalanche still claim that Hogwarts Legacy will be running on the actual Switch hardware, we'll see how that goes in July. If they can actually fit HL onto Switch, there's no reason ATVI couldn't fit CoD onto it too except sheer lack of motivation.
 

TexMex

Member
Wii had COD4, so there's precedent. Not only that, DOOM Eternal and TW3 run on Switch. Deck users are running around with 512GB and 1TB microSD cards, so Switch users can do it too.

I think the problem is that they promised it to mirror the features of the other console counterparts. Even the Wii COD4 was not as fully featured as the 360/PS3 counterparts. The the Wii is WAY closer in terms of power to a 360 than a Switch is to a XSX.
 

diffusionx

Gold Member
I don't think anyone was seriously thinking that ATVI would just copy and paste the exact version of CoD for current gen consoles and PC right onto Switch. Of course it would have to be a heavily reduced product, probably based on the last-gen versions but with extremely lower quality assets because nobody is going to try and download a 150 GB game from the Nintendo eShop and there aren't any cartridges that can store 150 GB either. I think the largest Switch game cart tops out at 64 GB of capacity.

According to this article: https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/21/...tendo-call-of-duty-agreement-legal-eu-hearing, The deal says "full feature and content parity", so yes, it is reasonable to hold them to that standard and judge them on their ability to deliver umm, full feature and content parity to the Nintendo Switch. That is the deal. So, yea, I also think it is totally reasonable to call MS out on this because, without knowing the specifics of the deal, what they are claiming they are going to do is impossible on Nintendo hardware right now. Remember it's closer to a 360 and they stopped porting these games to 360 almost a decade ago.

Wii had COD4, so there's precedent. Not only that, DOOM Eternal and TW3 run on Switch. Deck users are running around with 512GB and 1TB microSD cards, so Switch users can do it too.

Modern COD graphically is way, way more demanding than either Witcher 3 or Doom Eternal.
 
Last edited:

CrustyBritches

Gold Member
I think the problem is that they promised it to mirror the features of the other console counterparts. Even the Wii COD4 was not as fully featured as the 360/PS3 counterparts. The the Wii is WAY closer in terms of power to a 360 than a Switch is to a XSX.
Did they stop making it for Xbox One and PS4?

How many GFLOPS was Wii and how much RAM did it have compared to Xbox 360?

How many GFLOPS is Switch and how much RAM does it have compared to Xbox One? Or even XSS?
 

MikeM

Member
I feel like the Nintendo/MS deal is forward-looking. Its not meant for Switch.

But I could see Nintendo dragging Switch another 10 years lol because Nintendo
 

ChorizoPicozo

Gold Member
I’m as cynical about this as anyone but this just proves these people don’t even know what they’re looking at. Obviously MS intends cloud support not running locally off the hardware.
i dont think that is quite accurate but...i dont remember the quote.
it was something that Brad Smith said implying a native app .
 

Tams

Member
Man, Phil was right about how ignorant regulators are when it comes to the gaming industry.
Do you honestly think the regulators are in the wrong here and that these big business are in the right?

He's not going to give a free Xbox and a sneek peak at Starfield.

This isn't about technical feasibility. Of course it's possible: Fortnite, Overwatch, APEX, Rogue Company etc. are already on the Switch and COD has even been on the DS.

No, it's about how likely they think a serious effort is going to be made have COD games in the Switch that are in the same area as the yearly releases. And given the bloat of COD these days, streaming being no good for a twitch shooter, and there having been no COD for Switch even mentioned until now... they areblikely right in their analysis that this is not an honest attempt.
 
Last edited:

analog_future

Resident Crybaby
MS just want to put the cloud.

This always seemed to me like a way for MS to try and get the deal approved without really having the technical authority to truly claim they can make CoD on Switch in a compelling way.

I mean, I'm sure at some level it is possible. But at what cost? Significant dev time spent downporting and ultimately not making Switch owners all that happy with what they're getting for the end product anyways.

This is what has happened in the past and I don't really see any reason for that to be different today. So when Activision developers hear Microsoft making these sorts of claims - I wonder if they're just rolling their eyes at what they're going to be forced into.

I aways though there are reasons for why Activision didn't brought CoD to Switch, even though they aways had in the past with Wii, DS and 3DS.

I bet they just want their main game ported but giving the nature of Switch and their games acting as GaaS(meaning constant updates and huge space consuming), they probably think its too much of hassle just to put there, even though they are the types to throw CoD everywhere.

Can it run Control, or any recent RE title?

I’m as cynical about this as anyone but this just proves these people don’t even know what they’re looking at. Obviously MS intends cloud support not running locally off the hardware.

Wii had COD4, so there's precedent. Not only that, DOOM Eternal and TW3 run on Switch. Deck users are running around with 512GB and 1TB microSD cards, so Switch users can do it too.

Yes, via the cloud.

According to this article: https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/21/...tendo-call-of-duty-agreement-legal-eu-hearing, The deal says "full feature and content parity", so yes, it is reasonable to hold them to that standard and judge them on their ability to deliver umm, full feature and content parity to the Nintendo Switch. That is the deal. So, yea, I also think it is totally reasonable to call MS out on this because, without knowing the specifics of the deal, what they are claiming they are going to do is impossible on Nintendo hardware right now. Remember it's closer to a 360 and they stopped porting these games to 360 almost a decade ago.



Modern COD graphically is way, way more demanding than either Witcher 3 or Doom Eternal.

Well, then I guess it can run any CoD in the same way

Cloud edition. Can the game even fit on a cartridge

i dont think that is quite accurate but...i dont remember the quote.
it was something that Brad Smith said implying a native app .


Ya'll have to be more forward thinking here. This agreement is clearly going to impact the Switch 2, not the current Switch.

COD is not going to be played via Cloud on Nintendo hardware. It's going to run natively on Switch 2 and we won't see COD games on Switch 1.
 
Last edited:

ChorizoPicozo

Gold Member
Ya'll have to be more forward thinking here. This agreement is clearly going to impact the Switch 2, not the current Switch.

COD is not going to be played via Cloud on Nintendo hardware. It's going to run natively on Switch 2 and we won't see COD games on Switch 1.

Brad Smith' words. not mine
 

RCU005

Member
I guess people are missing the point? Microsoft was guaranteed that Nintendo players would have the same experience as PlayStation and Xbox, however they are saying it is not possible.

The game could come out via Cloud, but it still wouldn’t be the same experience (whether due to lag, framerate, storage, etc)

The regulators seem like they are right.
 

Fredrik

Member
I’m as cynical about this as anyone but this just proves these people don’t even know what they’re looking at. Obviously MS intends cloud support not running locally off the hardware.
Cloud support, why?
The deal won’t close until 2024, by that time we’ll play on Nintendo’s next console, in 10 years we’ll play on their next-next console. Why is anyone focused on the OG Switch at this time? It’s 6 years old.
 

Three

Member
It would have to be really pared back to the point where I doubt many would even buy it there but I think both MS and Activision are aware of this hence why Activison haven't done it themselves and are using it as leverage for regulators instead. f2p warzone might have some chance.
 
Last edited:

TexMex

Member
Ya'll have to be more forward thinking here. This agreement is clearly going to impact the Switch 2, not the current Switch.

COD is not going to be played via Cloud on Nintendo hardware. It's going to run natively on Switch 2 and we won't see COD games on Switch 1.

Save this post everyone.
 
Just decline the sales already!! I'm not a big fan of this purchase I don't care about cod but seeing over franchises going into Microsoft with there so many studios already I don't think it's fair and Activision don't need Microsoft to put there games on Nintendo
 
Top Bottom