Digital Foundry: Lots of devs at Gamescom said they aren't able to get Switch 2 dev kits. There are even weird exclusions for some big AAA developers

adamsapple

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
John: "Where I've spoken with plenty of developers where they were either told that their game.. they should just ship it on Switch 1 and rely on backwards compatibility. There's a lot of developers that are unable to get Switch 2 dev kits. We talked to a lot of devs at Gamescom this year and so many of them said the same things. They want to ship on Switch 2. They would love to do Switch 2 versions. They can't get the hardware. It's really difficult right now."
Click to expand...
Oliver: "I don't really understand the strategy because like you said, even now developers are struggling to get systems. And I know that some months ago when we're, you know, hearing things through the grapevine and talking to people, there were some weird exclusions with some big developers struggling to get kits for games, from what we've heard. And there were some weird inclusions as well, like some indies were included which is nice to see but like there's that campfire game you know the kind of camera campfire game and they're getting kits and some big developers on the other hand who developed like AAA stuff aren't necessarily in the pipeline there for kits."
Click to expand...


 
Last edited:
Yep. I've been hearing this too and it's a joke seeing games like Terminator no fate with no switch 2 version.

Switch 2 has a miniscule library, whereas steam deck's library has no end.
 
Nintendo deciding who does and doesn't get a kit.

Proud Mr Bean GIF by Working Title
 
bold GIF


I honestly don't understand what they are doing at this point. Why limit who can make Switch 2 games and who can't?

If it's because of the slop that the Switch 1 got infested with, just do a better job keeping that stuff off the shops or look into a devs history.

Also how did Microsoft get a devkit?
 
They don't want people doing direct comparisons with other consoles over big multi-platform releases, so they'll allow only indies for the time being
 
Yeah I doubt many developers of consequence are having trouble getting dev kits, especially AAA. I struggle to think of a single AAA publisher that doesn't have a Switch 2 game already released / announced to release soon.

Sure Joe Indie studio might be complaining but it's all here say and anecdotal.
 
I don't really get what Nintendo gets out of this.
Wouldn't they want as much third party support as possible? It makes the console more appealing and they get a nice cut from every third party sale.
 
Fbh said:
I don't really get what Nintendo gets out of this.
Wouldn't they want as much third party support as possible? It makes the console more appealing and they get a nice cut from every third party sale.
Click to expand...
Maybe to push for Switch 1 support to not kill its sales, since the games work on Switch 2 anyway
 
Fbh said:
I don't really get what Nintendo gets out of this.
Wouldn't they want as much third party support as possible? It makes the console more appealing and they get a nice cut from every third party sale.
Click to expand...
Even more confusing is they purposely delayed the launch to stockpile as many units as possible, yet despite that they couldn't have dev kits ready?
 
tkscz said:
Also how did Microsoft get a devkit?
Click to expand...

I think there's every reason to believe that most studios under the Microsoft umbrella only got devkits fairly recently, probably later than many other major publishers.

So far only one Microsoft game has been released for the Switch 2, Tony Hawk 3+4, and that's from Iron Galaxy, a studio that has a long history of porting games to the Switch and may have been shown preferential treatment by Nintendo. It also seems likely that 1+2 Remake sold well on the Switch, which might have incentivized Nintendo to prioritize the new remakes. (You have to imagine that WB got a devkit mostly because of Hogwarts Legacy's extreme success on the Switch 1.)

Meanwhile, the only other Microsoft game announced for the platform is Indiana Jones, which isn't coming until next year and which is from another studio with a history of porting their games to Switch 1 (Machine Games).

We'll probably see a bunch of other MS games coming next year, but that will probably be the case for a bunch of other studios who got late devkits too. There's no reason to think Microsoft got special treatment.
 
Last edited:
We need names of these "big devs" IO Interactive, Hello Games and Iron Galaxy managed to get them, why are these "big devs" at the back of the list?
 
Last edited:
adamsapple said:
Click to expand...

I've heard this too, but the other side, from a few small devs here in Spain.

Like 'Hey, we got a devkit in a timely manner and didn't have to suck big dick, so cool'. 😙🤌🏻🤌🏻

Thing is, small devs, mom&pop studios or single devs maybe just need the one and only devkit. Or few of them, far far fewer than big devs/pubs.

Yep, I include pubs because, even if they don't program or put together a game, pubs have devkits. TONS of them, sitting there.

PR has devkits too. Lots of offices of suits have devkits. And lots of meeting rooms in lots of places. Bangladeshi, Indonesian and Indian contractors or sweatshops churning lard and textures, geometry, code, etc have lots of devkits.

You know, shit that doesn't touch the main dev, but just speeds development so you can sell product faster, pay less for less time to less people and make money faster.

So the complaint is DF going to their big boi devs and big pub pals and dickgobbling them and their dick tears of how bad it's they don't get their 80 extra devkits but just another one because Nintendo decided to spread devkits to 79 other devs and those devs are proper joyous. 😙

So, big devs, from the bottom of my heart, go fuck yourself and your balance shit. 😄
 
Last edited:
Nintendo has been very retard with the way they handled this situation... I know they're not in a hurry because they're still selling but it's not like games will suddenly stop coming to the system if devs port their games to it
 
I realize that the impatient would takeaway from this something negative about Nintendo, but there really is only 1 real takeaway of relevance.

In the thread where that one dude kept saying Switch 2 wouldn't get 3rd party support, I told everyone that they would get it. Every game that comes out not announced for Switch 2 is a confirmation bias for those against me.

This makes it very clear that once these kits get in the hands of all 3rd party devs, everything is coming and I was right all along.

You think this is bad news to Nintendo but it isn't even news to me. I predicted this exact circumstance and expected this is why 3rd party support was slow to roll out.

Patience is a superpower. Super patience beats super strength every time. I can prove it. Let's say you have a super power of shooting ki out of your hands. That's pretty good, but you can emulate that superpower with human tools. Can you emulate becoming Elden Lord? I thought not.
 
Last edited:
Is this hubris from the S1 success? Nintendo is usually happy to court third parties, even if they don't sell nearly as well as their first party stuff. Every previous machine had at least some amount of decent third party support, even at launch window. I can't see this as "quality control" when there's still plenty of slop on the eshop and they are skipping big name (quality) devs. So what gives? Are the tariffs affecting dev kits or something?
 
its ok, switch 2 can sustain with first party games, seriously what idiots playing third party games on switch anyway? its going to run like ass
 
If I didn't know better, I'd think Nintendo didn't really want to release a successor yet. If they could drag the SW1 kicking and screaming into 2027 and utilize the 150m userbase without having to grow a new one for SW2, I think that would have been ideal for them. Because after 8 years on the market, it should have been all systems go as far as having dev kits readily available for SW2 development and a more robust launch year lineup. Right now, I get the sense they went 'you all wanted a more powerful Switch, right? Here. Now shut up and go play some Switch 1 games on it, and we'll toss in a few SW2 games to remind you that you do in fact, have a SW2'.

Silly as this may seem, I'm about to buy a mint condition Mario Red OLED for $150 this evening off FB marketplace( sold my OLED last year thinking I'd be on SW2 at launch, but so far meh). I don't get the sense I'm going to need the SW2 much before 2027, or whenever they release the mid gen OLED refresh.
 
Last edited:
Good old Nintendo. Between this and the other rumor mentioning that they asked some developers to not release too many games this year, they seem to be on turning such a successful launch into a nightmare to everyone but themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Digital Foundry: Apex Legends Switch 2 comparison to Series S and original Switch
17
236
kevboard replied
Hogwarts Legacy - Switch 2 Face-Off - Digital Foundry
2
70
2K
SaiyanRaoh replied
FAST Fusion - Switch 2 - Digital Foundry Analysis
2 3
112
2K
Karim replied
Digital Foundry: 'Too Big' For Steam Deck: AAA Games Are Struggling On Valve's Handheld
2 3
109
6K
Zathalus replied
Digital Foundry: Donkey Kong Bananza - Nintendo Switch 2
Analysis  8 9 10 11 12
565
3K
krumble replied
Top Bottom