Support NeoGAF

[element]

I agree, but I've always been one who tries to work within the limits I've been given. I don't push the limits and try to control the things I can control. I don't consider myself normal in that regard.

But that is the thing, when it gets down to it and you can't change the things you can control and a sub-system that you aren't using is taking resources or is causing a problem and you can't touch it at all. Good that you stay within the limits, but sometimes things move and all options need to be available.

I think there's a lot there for people who are just getting started. Also, I think the 2D framework in Unity is great. Let's not even forget about the Asset Store which can help people get started. I doubt I would have gotten anywhere without that. Then a build of the game can be made for lots of different platforms. I don't get that feeling with Unreal 4. Don't get me wrong, there's a lot that can be done with Unreal, but I think tapping into that initially is difficult.

I guess when I say "flexible" I mean it's easy to tap into the basic functionality of the engine without much effort whether it's a 2D game or 3D game and there are lots of assets on the store to help people gets started with whatever game they want to make on just about any platform you want.

Unreal has the marketplace. game project samples and you can build to any platform (given you have the proper licenses). Unity does have 'Complete Projects', but given talent and resources, most teams would find them a waste as they would redo most of the work. Unreal IS a different environment for sure, but almost everyone I talk with finds it pretty straight forward to get something running.

 

[OmegaDL50]

I'm just saying why some people were disappointed at the home console part. They probably have no interest in the portable part.

I honestly have no idea what better power we can get in that form factor at the price. But here's a question, what kind of power can we expect from such a form factor for a $100 extra? Also, if the switch didn't have the joycons, therefore having more $ room to spend (maybe an extra 50-60? Don't know how much joycons cost), would it have been possible to spend on more powerful chips for this form factor? Are they available? How powerful can such chips be compared to smart phones/tablets, these being even slimmer in size compared to switch? If such more power is available, I'm guessing portable mode can still be locked to current switch portable mode to avoid more heat and lower battery life?

Legit questions.

Not much more powerful. The current most powerful mobile chip is the Tegra X2, the Switch has the Tegra X1. So even at $100 more it wouldn't be a significant difference, Also if you care to look inside the Switch the battery takes up roughly 60% of the interior of the device leaving little other room for the SoC, heatsink, and fans. Still the device using a more powerful chip would draw more power, and thus produce more heat, which in turn affects battery life. The Joycons wouldn't effect this because they are mainly standard bluetooth input devices, the vibration tech might be something of note however.

They were as efficiency as they possibly could be considering the innards and size of the thing (which in itself is slightly larger than a half of the upper screen of a 3DS XL

The only solution to have more power would be to increase the size of the device, which means it loses it's appeal as a portable. The Switch already is on the upper limits of reasonable size for a handheld, anything larger would defeat the purpose and then it brings it back to the rationality of being a handheld form factor rather than a dedicated set-top box like console device which could take advantage of more power.

Ultimately it comes down to the current progression of mobile technology, which is mainly limited by battery itself. The Tegra K2 is a decent chip, but it's not going to make a world of difference. 2.5 Times more GPU power is basically the difference between the PS4 and PS4 Pro.

The Switch with a Tegra K2 would basically be a Switch Pro, and it's not really a game changer. The only significant difference maybe would be the handheld being dedicated 1080p output and not 720p making less need for OC when the device is docked.

 

[Kittehkraken]

More developers not wanting to do the extra work or lacking the talent of actually doing it properly.

The Wii U ran massive open world games like Xenoblade X and BoTW. Don't give me that bullshit lower end hardware can't get the job done.

 

[Merchandise]

Forgive me for not remembering the user who posted on a similar thread a while back, but echoing the sentiment that if Nintendo can get a game like BOTW to work on Switch without the TRUE 4K POWER, other developers don't have much of an excuse.

 

[jmizzal]

People act like more powerful Nintendo console means automatic AAA 3rd party support, they would just move to the excuse that those types of games dont sell on Nintendo systems.

Forgive me for not remembering the user who posted on a similar thread a while back, but echoing the sentiment that if Nintendo can get a game like BOTW to work on Switch without the TRUE 4K POWER, other developers don't have much of an excuse.

Like the poster above said it also runs on WiiU lol

 

[Hip Hop]

Forgive me for not remembering the user who posted on a similar thread a while back, but echoing the sentiment that if Nintendo can get a game like BOTW to work on Switch without the TRUE 4K POWER, other developers don't have much of an excuse.

They do when its extra work to scale down and the owner base isn't there.

 

[Poppyseed]

For a handheld Switch has pretty powerful hardware so not sure what more they expected?

Is it that powerful, though? Just because there aren't any dedicated handhelds as powerful as the Switch doesn't mean it's all powerful. I expect the iPhone 7 and iPad Pro 2 are more powerful, for one thing.

 

[jmizzal]

Is it that powerful, though? Just because there aren't any dedicated handhelds as powerful as the Switch doesn't mean it's all powerful. I expect the iPhone 7 and iPad Pro 2 are more powerful, for one thing.

Those also cost over $700 I would hope they were more powerful

 

[wonderful103]

Is it that powerful, though? Just because there aren't any dedicated handhelds as powerful as the Switch doesn't mean it's all powerful. I expect the iPhone 7 and iPad Pro 2 are more powerful, for one thing.

Nine hundred and ninety nine us throttles! I mean, dollars!

 

[Kamina]

THQ having issues with getting Battle Chasers to run smoothly? WTF?

Is it that powerful, though? Just because there aren't any dedicated handhelds as powerful as the Switch doesn't mean it's all powerful. I expect the iPhone 7 and iPad Pro 2 are more powerful, for one thing.

But these also cost 2-3 times as much.

 

[Nightbird]

Whenever someone says to me that the Switch is weak, and that it should be more powerful, I'll show them this picture:

And ask them where exactly they think the more powerful chips should go.

It usually also shuts down discussions about the battery.

We've know long before the Form factor of the Switch was leaked that an home-/handheld hybrid simply could not be as powerful as X1/PS4.

 

[MattKeil]

More developers not wanting to do the extra work or lacking the talent of actually doing it properly.

The Wii U ran massive open world games like Xenoblade X and BoTW. Don't give me that bullshit lower end hardware can't get the job done.

Why do the "extra work" for no return? There's no reason for third parties to bust their asses for Switch ports until the Switch becomes a large enough factor in the market to make it financially worthwhile. That hasn't happened yet and may never happen. It's essentially two gens behind the current standard in terms of console power and won't be getting much that isn't made with Switch hardware specifically in mind. I don't know why Switch fans are still shocked by this.

 

[OmegaDL50]

Those also cost over $700 I would hope they were more powerful

Even if that was the case, The iPhone or iPad 2 generally don't get console experiences along the lines of BOTW or stuff like Xenoblade anyways, so using them in comparison against the Switch and it's price point is entirely moot.

 

[FinaruDensetsu]

Whenever someone says to me that the Switch is weak, and that it should be more powerful, I'll show them this picture:

And ask them where exactly they think the more powerful chips should go.

It usually also shuts down discussions about the battery.

We've know long before the Form factor of the Switch was leaked that an home-/handheld hybrid simply could not be as powerful as X1/PS4.

It's definitely extremely strong for a handheld but that's all it is, a handheld. It's as much a home console as the pspgo was back in its day.

Nintendo no longer has a home console and that's what Nordic was disappointed about.

 

[User123456]

Yeah, it's pretty disappointing that the Switch is only the most powerful device ever made to date in its form factor. Are they even aware of that?

 

[webkatt]

Has it ever been speculated that the Switch is intentionally under/differently powered compared to current-gen consoles in a ploy to have devs make Switch specific games that can easily be ported to more powerful consoles versus receiving downgraded ports, Or having console exclusive games?

Asking for a friend

 

[Marcel]

The power thing may be a valid factor for them but it's mostly smokescreen for the whole "We simply don't want to make things for the Switch" that many third parties are saying through their inaction.

This is hardly surprising and I doubt it will be the last time we hear about it.

 

[Jimrpg]

I guess that basically translates to, how can we sell our games on this system when it just doesn't look as good, everyone is just going to buy the PS4/PC version.

 

[Kittehkraken]

Why do the "extra work" for no return? There's no reason for third parties to bust their asses for Switch ports until the Switch becomes a large enough factor in the market to make it financially worthwhile. That hasn't happened yet and may never happen. It's essentially two gens behind the current standard in terms of console power and won't be getting much that isn't made with Switch hardware specifically in mind. I don't know why Switch fans are still shocked by this.

But they don't say that.

A developer saying the Switch is having a hard time running a 2D turn based game has nothing to do with market share. Its a scapegoat for poor running code.

If they admitted its because they don't want to put in the time and money just yet, I'd respect that. But they don't, they blame the hardware. Its a bullshit excuse that deserves to be called out.

 

[neurosisxeno]

But they don't say that.

A developer saying the Switch is having a hard time running a 2D turn based game has nothing to do with market share. Its a scapegoat for poor running code.

If they admitted its because they don't want to put in the time and money just yet, I'd respect that. But they don't, they blame the hardware. Its a bullshit excuse that deserves to be called out.

Not all devs have 5 years and 200+ people on staff to pump out a game that pushes the hardware to the limit. BotW had been in development for how long as an example?

 

[Mister Wolf]

But they don't say that.

A developer saying the Switch is having a hard time running a 2D turn based game has nothing to do with market share. Its a scapegoat for poor running code.

If they admitted its because they don't want to put in the time and money just yet, I'd respect that. But they don't, they blame the hardware. Its a bullshit excuse that deserves to be called out.

Exactly. The other excuses are you cant compare it to the first party games but Mario + Rabbids is not a first party game and runs on Ubisoft's Snowdrop engine and its well above Battle Chasers.

 

[OmegaDL50]

Why do the "extra work" for no return? There's no reason for third parties to bust their asses for Switch ports until the Switch becomes a large enough factor in the market to make it financially worthwhile. That hasn't happened yet and may never happen. It's essentially two gens behind the current standard in terms of console power and won't be getting much that isn't made with Switch hardware specifically in mind. I don't know why Switch fans are still shocked by this.

The Switch is more powerful than the Wii U which by extension is more powerful than the PS3 / 360.

Unless you are counting the PS4 Pro / Xbox One X as separate gens, which you shouldn't, if anything it is a half generation behind the PS4 and Xbox One, certainly not two.

 

[dex3108]

Has it ever been speculated that the Switch is intentionally under/differently powered compared to current-gen consoles in a ploy to have devs make Switch specific games that can easily be ported to more powerful consoles versus receiving downgraded ports, Or having console exclusive games?

Asking for a friend

Why would devs go generation or more back and limit themselves when they have more powerful hardware to work with and with that more freedom?

The power thing may be a valid factor for them but it's mostly smokescreen for the whole "We simply don't want to make things for the Switch" that many third parties are saying through their inaction.

This is hardly surprising and I doubt it will be the last time we hear about it.

If there is money there why wouldn't they want to do it?

 

[neurosisxeno]

The Switch is more powerful than the Wii U which by extension is more powerful than the PS3 / 360.

Unless you are counting the PS4 Pro / Xbox One X as separate gens, which you shouldn't, if anything it is a half generation behind the PS4 and Xbox One, certainly not two.

I'd say it's a full gen at least. The difference between the PS4/X1 and PS3/360 is pretty massive when you consider that almost all games for this gen were 1080/900p out of the gates, with quite a few at solid frame rates, and the last gen was mostly 720p upscaling and 1080/30 at absolute best. I've played some PS3 games lately and compared to something like The Order or HZD games like RDR definitely show their age.

 

[Kittehkraken]

Not all devs have 5 years and 200+ people on staff to pump out a game that pushes the hardware to the limit. BotW had been in development for how long as an example?

How about, Mario Kart 8? Captain Toad? Bayonetta 2? Wonderfull 101? Donkey Kong? Lego City? Toyko Mirage? Hyrule Warriors? Paper Mario? Pokken Tournament? Skylanders? Rayman? Child of Light? etc... etc... etc...

The Wii U had a ton of great looking and running games. BotW took forever because the game kept changing, not because they couldn't optimize it.

 

[dex3108]

How about, Mario Kart 8? Captain Toad? Bayonetta 2? Wonderfull 101? Donkey Kong? Lego City? Toyko Mirage? Hyrule Warriors? Paper Mario? Pokken Tournament? Skylanders? Rayman? Child of Light? etc... etc... etc...

The Wii U had a ton of great looking and running games. BotW took forever because the game kept changing.

Graphics is not the only thing that needs resources.

 

[zelas]

More developers not wanting to do the extra work or lacking the talent of actually doing it properly.

The Wii U ran massive open world games like Xenoblade X and BoTW. Don't give me that bullshit lower end hardware can't get the job done.

There's far more to performance than size. Anyone could make a massive world if they skimp on fidelity. Xenoblade X is the poster boy for those kind of gimmicks. If anything is "lazy" its that.

Imagine if Horizon were ported to Switch. The game would end up basically being an exclusive title considering the work needed to downgrade the game to run on Switch. That presents a serious money concern for devs on top of being a drain on resources and time needed for other platforms. None of that has anything to do with "lazy devs."

 

[element]

There's far more to performance than size. Anyone could make a massive world if they skimp on fidelity. Xenoblade X is the poster boy for those kind of gimmicks. If anything is "lazy" its that.

Imagine if Horizon were ported to Switch. The game would end up basically being an exclusive title considering the work needed to downgrade the game to run on Switch. That presents a serious money concern for devs on top of being a drain on resources and time needed for other platforms. None of that has anything to do with "lazy devs."

Graphics is not the only thing that needs resources.

Quote for truth on both of these.

People seem to make it sound as if the devs aren't willing to try. Each platform has an established performance threshold. Depending where your game hits the most, CPU or GPU, most devs can say pretty quickly if something would run and what systems would have to be refactored in a porting process. Reducing textures or lowering draw calls is easy optimizations, but we aren't talking about that in most cases.

When a dev says something isn't powerful enough, what that really means is the amount of effort in refactoring and cuts will negatively affect the game by costing too much manpower.

The way people talk in here is you could get Uncharted 4 to run on an PlayStation 2 if only Naughty Dog optimized it enough.

 

[neurosisxeno]

How about, Mario Kart 8? Captain Toad? Bayonetta 2? Wonderfull 101? Donkey Kong? Lego City? Toyko Mirage? Hyrule Warriors? Paper Mario? Pokken Tournament? Skylanders? Rayman? Child of Light? etc... etc... etc...

The Wii U had a ton of great looking and running games. BotW took forever because the game kept changing, not because they couldn't optimize it.

Half those games look great because of good aesthetics, not demanding graphics. A good number of them also spent 2-3+ years in development or had massive teams behind them. Skylanders ran great on every platform, but it also was a money factory so Activision made sure they were very well staffed. Paper Mario/Donkey Kong/W101/Rayman were all good looking because they had very good aesthetics and interesting art styles. A lot of those games ran on lower resolutions (much like EOL PS3/360 games) and were upscaled, and a good number of them are first and second party Nintendo releases so it's not surprising the quality is higher than most third party devs.

 

[Formosa]

Yup it's also the reason why Switch is not getting Monster Hunter World. Sad.

 

[FlutterPuffs]

I am too, to be honest,

I love my Switch and a lot of games look great for it, but devs are now working with much more stronger machines with better CPUs. Indies of course will focus first on PS4, Xbox One and the average PC specs before porting to Switch.

I do see a silver lining to this though.

A lot of Japanese devs are just coming to grips with developing games in HD. The Switch is a good in-between stage for them.

 

[retardedrockstar]

What do companies get with saying stuff like this?

 

[FlutterPuffs]

Yup it's also the reason why Switch is not getting Monster Hunter World. Sad.

I think this is possible. The MT framework is one hell of an engine.

Might be a sub-720p game though.

 

[Astral Dog]

Well they aren't the only ones

 

[Usobuko]

the title doesn't really match the contents of the interview imho

Am I seeing an edited title?

If not, yes I do agree with you. Kinda overblown.

 

[DieH@rd]

I feel like, if it can run Zelda, it should be able to run their 2D turn-based RPG.

If switch can handle WiiU port created by the hundreds of 1st party devs over 4 years of work... it surely has to play a turn based RPG game created in UNITY by several starving indie devs who dont have much time or resources on their hands!

 

[Compsiox]

It must be hard for them to get the next Destroy All Humans on it. Hopefully they figure it out.

 

[IsntChrisL]

Well it's interesting. Think about a world where Nintendo simply released the NX, a $300 dedicated console that landed somewhere between the PS4 and PS4 Pro, power-wise. It would have been able to easily run any port but it also probably would have sold a lot less than the less-powerful Switch is selling now. By creating the powerful system, they find themselves risking another Gamecube. By focusing on the gimmick, they risk another Wii.

They had to take the risk. It's what Nintendo has always been. Beyond being a helluva marketing gimmick, it also alleviates their software drought problem quite a bit. With little-to-no third party support, Wii U owners saw Nintendo give almost all new IP's to the 3DS. And many of the franchises they wanted to see never showed up.

It was a Hail Mary but it paid off. As different as the Switch is, I don't think anyone is surprised Nintendo came up with it. The Switch could be a powerhouse console but that doesn't mean it would get third party support. It's gotta sell well. Nintendo's in a weird spot now because they'll probably be sticking with the Switch format for several generations to come.

Right now, they just need to figure out how to make more of them. That's a good problem to have. The Wii got a lot of third party support. Much of it was crap but most of those developers have moved to mobile. Switch sales will at least guarantee healthy indie support and improved third party support.

Part of me wishes that Nintendo had gone for a dedicated console because I very rarely use handheld mode. But I know that wouldn't really help the third party support beyond maybe a few late ports at launch. Just like the Wii though, I think the Switch will influence the industry. If it continues to blow up in sales I could see Sony and Microsoft following suite eventually. I'm already sure that mobile is next.

 

[pixelation]

3rd parties are making AAA games for home consoles (PS4,XBO), not for handhelds. That's why they say that the Switch is underpowered (as a home console) because it is, there's no need to get upset about the truth. Also 3rd party games generally sell poorly on Nintendo consoles so i guess that explains why they don't seem to thrilled about having going the extra mile to get the games running if what they get in return may not be worth the hassle.

 

[Alexander DeLarge]

More developers not wanting to do the extra work or lacking the talent of actually doing it properly.

The Wii U ran massive open world games like Xenoblade X and BoTW. Don't give me that bullshit lower end hardware can't get the job done.

Exclusives developed internally that obviously account for the Wii U's shortcomings? Yeah, it's a little different when you're talking about third parties that are trying to release on multiple platforms. If third parties are to do this, they're either expected to hold themselves back to make up for the Switch's shortcomings or they have to butcher their games. Asking third parties to do either is unreasonable and god help us if they design games for the Switch on a technical level.

We just got out of the shitty situation of being held back by previous gen like two years ago. I don't want to go back to that just because Nintendo put out hardware that isn't as powerful as the other consoles which released in 2013.

 

[Retro Edge]

I mean, who can be mad at them? Developing for the Switch is like making a port for last gens PS3 and 360 again. Can't be fun.

 

[IsntChrisL]

I mean, who can be mad at them? Developing for the Switch is like making a port for last gens PS3 and 360 again. Can't be fun.

How so?

 

[NimbusD]

If it was $400 then it would've been much closer or probably on par with xb1 power in console mode, and powerful as it is now in portable mode, so maybe that would justify the price. Some people just aren't happy with console mode's power. Maybe we'd see a console refresh in a year or 2?

Yeah... It doesn't work like that. You don't add 100 bucks to a handheld and jump a gen.

 

[Peterc]

This is funny, switch us like twice as powerful compared of what vita was in power at the time it was released. It's a dream device.


I rather think they didn't got the attention they need from nintendo.

 

[Peterc]

Yeah, except the Switch has 8 times the RAM, a way better CPU and GPU.

Only you're wrong. It's more like porting it to xbox one. Like they ported games to ps2 when they developed a game for gamecube

 

[Mutant]

Not much more powerful. The current most powerful mobile chip is the Tegra X2, the Switch has the Tegra X1. So even at $100 more it wouldn't be a significant difference, Also if you care to look inside the Switch the battery takes up roughly 60% of the interior of the device leaving little other room for the SoC, heatsink, and fans. Still the device using a more powerful chip would draw more power, and thus produce more heat, which in turn affects battery life. The Joycons wouldn't effect this because they are mainly standard bluetooth input devices, the vibration tech might be something of note however.

They were as efficiency as they possibly could be considering the innards and size of the thing (which in itself is slightly larger than a half of the upper screen of a 3DS XL



The only solution to have more power would be to increase the size of the device, which means it loses it's appeal as a portable. The Switch already is on the upper limits of reasonable size for a handheld, anything larger would defeat the purpose and then it brings it back to the rationality of being a handheld form factor rather than a dedicated set-top box like console device which could take advantage of more power.

Ultimately it comes down to the current progression of mobile technology, which is mainly limited by battery itself. The Tegra K2 is a decent chip, but it's not going to make a world of difference. 2.5 Times more GPU power is basically the difference between the PS4 and PS4 Pro.

The Switch with a Tegra K2 would basically be a Switch Pro, and it's not really a game changer. The only significant difference maybe would be the handheld being dedicated 1080p output and not 720p making less need for OC when the device is docked.

The Pascal architecture of the Tegra X2 is smaller, more powerful, and less power hungry than the Maxwell architecture of the X1.

 

[Retro Edge]

Yeah, except the Switch has 8 times the RAM, a way better CPU and GPU.

8 times in comparison to the Wii U?

And still we're getting games like Lego City Undercover or Snake Pass which runs like absolute shit in handheld mode. LCU with framerates from hell and Snake Pass with resolution straight out of 1999... Or so.

 

[SporeCrawler]

Why they wouldn't just view it as easily the most powerful handheld/hybrid device ever made and make a great game that fits that is beyond me. I play most of the triple A pc games on my weak ass Alienware Alpha at medium settings and they look fantastic and play just fine and the specs on some of those games are way higher than my specs. If you feel your game will sell well on the Switch do what you have to do to get it to run.

battle chasers looks very good

 

[lwilliams3]

I mean, who can be mad at them? Developing for the Switch is like making a port for last gens PS3 and 360 again. Can't be fun.

Nah. The Switch is moderately more powerful than those two by a notable degree (around 3x Wii U docked, which was a little more powerful than the 360's CPU in performance), has over 6x more usable memory for games, a CPU that is roughly half the power of the PS4's, and the GPU features is in the same level as the PS4Pro.

8 times in comparison to the Wii U?

And still we're getting games like Lego City Undercover or Snake Pass which runs like absolute shit in handheld mode. LCU with framerates from hell and Snake Pass with resolution straight out of 1999... Or so.

Lego City Undercover was probably just refined better for docked mode since only the GPU power is reduced when its undocked. Snake Pass has lower than usual resolutions for all systems. The devs decided to use the resources elsewhere. It should be noted that PS3 and 360 didn't even support UE4.

 

[Chao]

8 times in comparison to the Wii U?

And still we're getting games like Lego City Undercover or Snake Pass which runs like absolute shit in handheld mode. LCU with framerates from hell and Snake Pass with resolution straight out of 1999... Or so.

To be fair, Snake pass has trouble running even on a ps4, DF made a video analysis about it and if I recall correctly they needed to play it on a PS4 Pro to even reach 1080p, OG PS4 runs at 1536 x 864 30fps. Not sure if it's related to engine, optimization, or snake physics making the CPU work extra hard but that's how it is.