Considering UE4 support is confirmed I'm gonna say yes.
Yep. The newly rumored specs are lower than most expected, but it doesn't change that we know there will be multiplatform games, and that DQ XI has been planned to be on the system for a long time. And for all the extra hassle of making the advanced version, they probably don't want to limit its sales to one system with a quarter the 3DS's userbase.
Any sane people would.
The 3DS version of DQXI is made specifically with the dual screens in mind so why would the Switch version not be based on the PS4 version?
If we're being honest, the sweet spot for Nintendo systems is $200.
Anything more than that and they have to actually justify the added cost in a really obvious way. The only successful hardware they've had at more than $200 is Wii which was justified by Wii Sports + its really huge and diverse lineup.
Wii U being effectively $100 more than Wii was a joke in hindsight, as was 3DS being anywhere close to Wii's price.
I don't see why at this point. There's an incredible gulf of power(bigger than expected) and it's easier to port up than down.
Handhelds are consoles, people.
There are "home consoles", and "handheld consoles".
It's cancelled, because a small developer should focus on the console with a future. Like the Switch.Unity is supported on Wii U but Yooka Laylee is still cancelled.
Lets wait until January and see. Many developers are asked to be silence and, i guess, Sega announced Sonic long before that.Sonic is the only one announced that isn't on a last gen/Wii U system but then Sonic Team/Dimps has always made bespoke handheld versions...
It isn't "bigger than expected". Best case scenario was always close to the XBox One, while docked, and worst case was on par with the Wii U. Its somewhere in the middle right now.I don't see why at this point. There's an incredible gulf of power(bigger than expected) and it's easier to port up than down.
I'm pretty sure you still will act like you don't understand even though I'd explain this a thousand times, but again : it's way easier to port down with UE4, a very scalable engine, than port a 240p game in 1080p. It's not even porting at that side, it's a full remake. Switch is UE4 compatible = it will get the UE4 version. Because, again, there's not a single reason to not port the UE4 version.
Also, it's not a port. Both versions are developped alongside to be released in the same time. They won't just take the PS4 versions and downgrade it. They're making an UE4 version suited for the Switch.
Because Nintendo used "Home Console" to describe the Switch so far. I hope they correct there messaging in January.I tried pointing that out to posters in the past. However, everyone continue to bastardized the usage of "console".
Uh if you adjust for inflation then things aren't so simple.
Because Nintendo used "Home Console" to describe the Switch so far. I hope they correct there messaging in January.
Resident Evil: Revelations, Castlevania Mirror of Fate, Batman Arkham: Blackgate and One Piece Unlimited Red were all ported to 1080p systems without issue. They weren't completely remade.
What does that have to do with what I said ? They were all remade (or they were planning beforehand to release them on consoles) because you cannot just port a 240p game with all the assets, textures, and effects of a 3DS game. Even with the best upscaling ever made.
I won't argue much more on this, it should be fairly obvious about why it won't be a 3DS port, and I'm pretty sure that you perfectly understand it.
Uh if you adjust for inflation then things aren't so simple.
I'm not sure this matters so much when the cost per computing unit is a small fraction of what it was even ten years ago.
Because Nintendo used "Home Console" to describe the Switch so far. I hope they correct there messaging in January.
They weren't remade, some textures were upgraded but that's about it. As to the bolded wouldn't that exactly be the case with Switch then?
Handhelds are consoles, people.
There are "home consoles", and "handheld consoles".
Nintendo Switch is a home gaming system first and foremost. We have made no announcement regarding the future of Nintendo 3DS.
That... doesn't make any sense.
That... doesn't make any sense.
Yeah, no.
http://www.polygon.com/2016/10/20/13347910/nintendo-switch-home-gaming-system
https://www.vg247.com/2016/10/20/nintendo-says-switch-is-a-home-system-first-which-means-3ds-is-safe-for-now/
http://www.technobuffalo.com/2016/10/21/nintendo-says-switch-is-a-home-console-first-and-wont-replace-the-3ds-not-so-fast-nintendo/
The 3DS version looks like that because it was made for 3DS. Characters are chibi because the 3DS couldn't handle more. There is this huge cell-shading liner because the 3DS couldn't handle sharper models. And so on.
Making a Switch version based on the 3DS models, but suited for a more powerful hardware would lead to...the UE4 version. Think about it. The 3DS version is the same as the PS4 one, but downgraded enough so it could run on a 3DS. So, of course they didn't do it like that, both versions got developped separately but both share the same art direction, they both are the same game as the core, but the PS4 is so much more powerful than the 3DS that they look nothing alike.
So, asking for a HD version based on the 3DS to be developped alongside is the same as asking for the UE4 version. Again, there's zero reasons to not expect the UE4 version on a UE4-compatible HD console.
I don't see how any of this is relevant to what I said.
Just because it's UE4-capable does not mean it can run a UE4 game designed for PS4 level hardware. UE3 is supported on Vita but the Borderlands port was complete garbage.
Because many people would compare the Switch to other home consoles. We know, that this is stupid, but if you look in the other thread, people go crazy, because the Switch isn't a on par with the PS4. But most people try to find the easiest way to compare stuff. Wording is important.Switch plays Zelda BOTW, Skyrim and Splatoon. Those are home console games. So what's there to correct?
I don't see how any of this is relevant to what I said.
Because I read the thread and saw that you're using the nuance of home and handheld console to justify why Switch is a handheld. I've seen this a lot on GAF recently and it's just not true at all.
Switch is and has always been marketed by Nintendo as their next home console.
This isn't even a point of contention as it was labelled by Nintendo as such. Wrong decision of course in the light of specs. Its more like a handheld that can output, rather than a home console that can be taken along with you.
This isn't even a point of contention as it was labelled by Nintendo as such. Wrong decision of course in the light of specs. Its more like a handheld that can output, rather than a home console that can be taken along with you.
Just because it's UE4-capable does not mean it can run a UE4 game designed for PS4 level hardware. UE3 is supported on Vita but the Borderlands port was complete garbage.
Look at it from SE's point of view. Which version will cost more to make and have more trouble making its money back? And how can they mitigate those costs?
On the other hand down-porting the PS4 version might cost a lot more money as it's much more difficult and it may perform to standards that consumers reject. Compare the consumer reaction to Toukiden vs Toukiden 2 on Vita.
The first game was an enhanced PSP port and the second one was a cruddy PS4 port. The first one sold a lot better.
But yeah my Switch ship hasn't sunk until it fails to move units in Japan, or, even managing to move units, Japan ignores it for obnoxious reasons, like Nintendo manages relations badly, Sony tosses money at the industry, developers are skittish to test a Nintendo platform, etc. Another blow would be traditional Nintendo support going mostly mobile. Both these things happening would truly sink the ship I'm on. Both are possible, but Switch has the potential to sail. I just hope it does.Japanese third-party won't have any problems with porting to the Switch. They managed to make PS4 to Vita ports so it's not like it will be a problem with them to deal with less powerful hardware. It just need to sell well.
Japanese third-party won't have any problems with porting to the Switch. They managed to make PS4 to Vita ports so it's not like it will be a problem with them to deal with less powerful hardware. It just need to sell well.
For sure, though I see people talking as if Nintendo hasn't intentionally tried to position this as a new home console, as if it justifies the potential spec deficit. The facts are that they're likely going to release another underpowered console, but that's okay.
I don't think the people criticizing them realise that this is probably the only route they could take either. They need to work out how to stop hemorrhaging marketshare before they even dream of going head to head with Sony and Microsoft.
Eh, it's been labeled by NoA as much. NCL is apparently just marketing it as a console- not home or portable- just a console.
This falls in line with what Iwata said several years ago about marketing products differently for different types of markets.
Yes they will, especially high end Japanese games. Its inevitably another hurdle.
Enjoy a high-expensive console you can apparently afford then.The switch is a weird case for me, because I get hyped if I look at it one way, and get very annoyed if I choose to look at it another.
If I see the Switch as a progression in their handheld market, this looks so sweet, coming up after the 3DS.
If I see the Switch as a progression in their home console market, I just get super frustrated as to why Nintendo cannot even meet the power of a PS4, a console that was released in 2013 for goodness sake.
And I'm leaning more to the annoyed side because Nintendo is marketing the Switch as a home console that goes portable. It's making me consider not bothering with it at all.
I love you Nintendo, always have, but your choices just piss me off this last decade, lol.
Enjoy a high-expensive console you can apparently afford then.
You're asking them for the unfeasible. A portable PS4.
The thing is mate, I just don't know why Nintendo sometimes has to choose an innovation that makes it difficult for them to keep specs somewhat competitive with what's already out on the market.
I don't believe the technology is as outdated as the Wii U or the 3DS. It's just that it's impossible to ask for both assets (portability and high power) because then you get an expensive console that very little people would end up buying.The thing is mate, I just don't know why Nintendo sometimes has to choose an innovation that makes it difficult for them to keep specs somewhat competitive with what's already out on the market.
The 3DS as an example (even though I love mine), how many people actually use the 3d effect when playing their games? I'd guess not many, especially when you play for hours on end. If they took out the 3D gimmick and just beefed it up a little more, it'd be perfect.
I just so badly want to see what Nintendo can do with cutting edge specs. I've been waiting for a home console from them with this dream in mind and it looks like it will never happen with their current philosophy.
All in all I don't think the GPU FLOPS will make much of a difference to most of us. Based on everything we've heard from developers this appears to be the best Nintendo console in ages in terms of developer tools and APIs which likely affect third party games much moreso than raw power.
I keep looking at my 3DS and my Gamepad and just wishing I can get all the games I love on a device with a similar type of form factor, so I can play them all in bed, on the treadmill, at my parents' house... etc. I think this really does little to dampen the overall appeal of the Switch.
I don't believe the technology is as outdated as the Wii U or the 3DS. It's just that it's impossible to ask for both assets (portability and high power) because then you get an expensive console that very little people would end up buying.
I don't believe what they're doing with the switch would hurt them because of the lack of high-end specs, and what they failed on the Wii U was more so of a confusing console that they couldn't capitalized on for the market nor the audience. If they fight Sony and Microsoft regarding techpower, I think they will lose that fight hence I prefer this direction.
A repost from the dev kit leak thread:
Resolution changes were pretty flat from NES to SNES to N64 (some exceptions especially with the Expansion Pak). Also flat from GameCube to Wii. That it's not pushing into new resolution territory so niche few could actually use it is not a very big deal.I wonder if it's a mistake marketing the Switch as a console.
It is for all for all intents and purposes it's a handheld. All the tech is inside a portable shell.
For a portable, going from 3DS's 240p resolution to 720p (12x) is an astronomical leap. Going from Wii U's 720p-1080p to 1080p (~2x) isn't.