Support NeoGAF

[Jubenhimer]

2019 is looking to be the year the Switch starts hitting its true stride With the 3DS on death's door, and third parties having enough time to get more games ready, 2019 and 2020 look to be the peak years for the system. But it's easy to forget that there were some growing pains for the Switch. Even with its success in 2017 and 2018, it took a while for developers to really understand what the Switch is as a platform, especially those coming from the 3DS and smartphone space. I think a large part of that is due to the nature of the Switch itself.

The Switch isn't really a handheld like the 3DS, PS Vita, or a Smartphone, and it's not really a main console like the PS4 or Xbox One. It's both, a bridge between the two worlds that audiences from both the mobile and console space can enjoy equally. This may have caused a lot of headaches among developers, even within Nintendo themselves as they tried to figure out what the Switch can actually do for gaming. Nintendo's unorthodox hardware has always subverted developers expectations, and the Switch is no different.

The main problem lies in the fact that it's not as simple as just up-porting 3DS gameplay and assets in HD. Because the Switch also needs to be enjoyed as a console, that means production values and gameplay need to work in a console environment as well. Take Fire Emblem: Three Houses for example. It's the first console Fire Emblem game in over 10 years. The 3DS games were pretty straight forward. They had simple 3D graphics, with some cutscenes and voice acting, and are meant to be enjoyed in short bursts on a commute. They had the production values of a mid-level PS2 or GameCube title, and for the 3DS that was acceptable, it was AAA for the system. But then you get to the Switch, and now the more powerful hybrid system needs to take into account players who will be playing both at home AND on the go. So not only does Intelligent Systems need to craft a new engine tailored for the Switch that allows for more modern production values and graphics, but also need to make sure the game is engrossing enough for players to binge for hours on end in front of a TV as well, in addition to optimizing the game for mobile play, as well as re-inventing the series core elements to make it fresh. It's a balancing act that requires more development time, money, and resources to accomplish, which is why the game had to be delayed twice, and bring in Koei Tecmo to help with development. And this is just one example. Pokemon Let's Go! had a surprisingly large team size and development cycle for the kind of game it is. A large part of that can be attributed to Game Freak needing a larger budget and more resources to craft a more unique experience for the Switch.

Then you have third parties. The mobile nature of the Switch, means you can't just port everything from the PS4 and Xbox One. Not just because of hardware limitations, but also because there are games on those systems that just work better in a living room setting. As such, you see a lot of third parties porting over less demanding games that can be enjoyed in short bursts, because those games are a natural fit for the Switch's portability. Back in the DS days, making a DS version of a multiplatform title required making a whole new game from scratch, which was easy to do on that system. But with today's hardware and development, it's easier to just downscale the PS4 assets for the Switch than build all new assets from scratch. And exclusive titles follow the same format as First party games. You can't just make mobile games for a TV, making a notable Switch exclusive requires balancing for both home and on-the-go settings. And all of this is to say nothing of all the multiplayer, motion control, and tabletop features the system offers as well.

I think as we go further into the life of the Switch, more and more developers will get the hang of how games should be developed for the system, and thus, develop more titles with a quicker turnaround, as we're seeing that starting to come into fruition with 2019. But If you want a reason as to why all these mid-level handheld style games and third party titles took so long to start coming in the mass, and why 2018 was pretty low-key for first party Nintendo games. I think this is a good reason why. The unique nature of the Switch needs a very different approach from traditional mobile and home console style of game development

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

Power is the only limitation, as was in Wii and Wii U. Portable gaming has been around since ever so I don't see what is so unique so that developers have to conceptually adapt to. They would like to release all their games on Switch but they can't cos the console is past-gen power. That's about it.

 

[Jubenhimer]

Power is the only limitation, as was in Wii and Wii U. Portable gaming has been around since ever so I don't see what is so unique so that developers have to conceptually adapt to. They would like to release all their games on Switch but they can't cos the console is past-gen power. That's about it.

The Switch is a hybrid. Which means you can't just up-res 3DS gameplay and production values and call it a day if you want to stand out. A major Switch game needs to be optimized for both console style gameplay, and mobile style gameplay, which requires more development time and resources to get used to. That's my main point. The hybrid nature of the system requires more time to adjust to compared to a standard handheld.

 

[Shifty]

The closest analog development-wise is PC, since developing for that platform also requires coverage of different configurations across low-end and high-end hardware.
Scalability systems are fairly common in multi-plats with established engines that target both PC and console, so extending to the lower end on the tech side isn't a huge deal. The asset problem can be solved with a combination of proper planning and automatic down-scaling tech like Simplygon.
I can imagine battery life in portable mode being a potential sticking point for longer-form games, though that's very much a case-by-case thing dependant on the game design.

Any studio that doesn't have a proper scalability setup will probably end up switching to Unreal 4 at this rate, given its native Switch support and the cost overhead of maintaining in-house tools.

A major Switch game needs to be optimized for both console style gameplay, and mobile style gameplay

Assuming that you're talking mobile as in 3DS rather than mobile as in phones, is there really that big of a difference? The inputs are the same outside of the addition of a proper right stick.
Switch allows developers to design once and cover both, which is a win compared to the last-gen solution of creating entirely separate games for console and portable platforms.

 

[petran79]

The closest analog development-wise is PC, since developing for that platform also requires coverage of different configurations across low-end and high-end hardware
.

Just one example. Imagine a scripted event or dialog at 1920x1080 res being configured for 3440x1440. They'd have to move all the scenes to different positions and timings

 

[mejin]

Power is the only limitation, as was in Wii and Wii U. Portable gaming has been around since ever so I don't see what is so unique so that developers have to conceptually adapt to. They would like to release all their games on Switch but they can't cos the console is past-gen power. That's about it.

also nintendo effect. at the end of the day, with a few exceptions, only nintendo games really sell big.

 

[Dontero]

Was the hybrid nature of the Switch difficult for developers to adjust to?

Looks out for all PC games out there.

NO

 

[Panajev2001a]

I found that several AAA games ported to or developed for Switch has UI’s clearly only optimised for docked mode. Lots of relatively tiny text items and menus that work decently well on a big screen TV, but are a bit messy/cluttered in handheld or tabletop mode... looking at you Diablo III and Skyrim... and others .

 

[cireza]

Well they obviously did not adjust since most of the time the games are optimized for only one of both modes.

What example of game is there that is :
undocked : 720p with true 720p UI
docked : 1080p with true 1080p UI

Dead Cells maybe, but that's the only one that comes to mind, and it is a small game. Most of the big games out there are either optimized for docked and run like shit in portable, or are optimized for portable and run 720p in docked.

As expected since the announcement of the console, the end result is a shitfest.

 

[Mr Hyde]

Most of the big games out there are either optimized for docked and run like shit in portable, or are optimized for portable and run 720p in docked.

As expected since the announcement of the console, the end result is a shitfest.

I don´t feel this is true at all. Every game so far that I have played have been very well optimized for both modes, although I´d say handheld usually performs better overall. The only shitfest here is your hyperboles.

 

[Shifty]

Just one example. Imagine a scripted event or dialog at 1920x1080 res being configured for 3440x1440. They'd have to move all the scenes to different positions and timings

I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. Are you talking in terms of a 2D game being rejigged to run at a different resolution?

Because that depends on the tech. Nearly all engines these days use 3D renderers (even for 2D games, look at Ori for example) that are based on an arbitrary non-pixel coordinate system, which allows them to work in a resolution-independent manner. That's how modern 2D stuff can smoothly zoom in and out of a scene without everything becoming horribly pixelated.

When I say 'scalability systems' I don't necessarily just mean resolution, I'm talking graphical presets- geometry detail, texture resolution, effects complexity, etc. The whole kit and caboodle.

 

[petran79]

I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. Are you talking in terms of a 2D game being rejigged to run at a different resolution?

Because that depends on the tech. Nearly all engines these days use 3D renderers (even for 2D games, look at Ori for example) that are based on an arbitrary non-pixel coordinate system, which allows them to work in a resolution-independent manner. That's how modern 2D stuff can smoothly zoom in and out of a scene without everything becoming horribly pixelated.

When I say 'scalability systems' I don't necessarily just mean resolution, I'm talking graphical presets- geometry detail, texture resolution, effects complexity, etc. The whole kit and caboodle.

One example: imagine a scripted 3d scene where two people are standing opposite each other and discuss. Then one character leaves the screen. If it were in HD, character would just need to dissappear from screen and stand still or vanish as long as he is not visible. At ultrawide you'd have either to increase the distance between the two or increase the footsteps of the character leaving so that he is not seen standing like a puppet all of a sudden.

 

[Shifty]

One example: imagine a scripted 3d scene where two people are standing opposite each other and discuss. Then one character leaves the screen. If it were in HD, character would just need to dissappear from screen and stand still or vanish as long as he is not visible. At ultrawide you'd have either to increase the distance between the two or increase the footsteps of the character leaving so that he is not seen standing like a puppet all of a sudden.

Oh I see, yeah that makes sense for different aspect ratios. A lot of old 4:3 RPGs have that in their cutscenes if you emulate them and use a widescreen hack- you'll be able to see characters literally 'waiting in the wings' before or after they're featured

I don't really see how it relates to Switch though, since it's a 16:9 panel much like most console / PC setups.

 

[cireza]

I don´t feel this is true at all. Every game so far that I have played have been very well optimized for both modes, although I´d say handheld usually performs better overall. The only shitfest here is your hyperboles.

What I stated should have been the norm, in the end it is the exception.

If you are happy with blurry games that drop pixels and frames all the time in handheld mode, or blurry 720p resolution + UI in docked that's good for you. But it is is not for me.

As a player that prefers one mode or the other, you need to take into account and do research for each game how they perform in each mode before buying, which is not a normal situation to me. Who wants to play Xenoblade 2 or Doom in handheld mode ?

 

[Mr Hyde]

Who wants to play Xenoblade 2

I play Xenoblade a lot in handheld and it´s not blurry, it does not drop pixels and the framedrops are barely noticeable. That goes for all the other 8 games I´ve played through on the Switch. The performance have been solid throughout, so yet again, cannot relate to your BS at all.

 

[cireza]

it does not drop pixels

Wow. If it does not disturb you then good for you, but don't spread false information. I bought Xeno 2 (one of my first game on Switch) and had to stop playing it because of how bad and eyestraining it was.