Support NeoGAF

[SportsFan581]

Realistically, if MS signed a 10 year deal to support Nintendo's platforms, they have some idea about what comes after the Switch. This is what, the 6th year for Switch? Something new is surely coming from them and I would suspect that it would have to be at least as powerful as the X1/PS4 that CoD is already supported on. LOL Some real brainiacs on this panel.

Though I doubt they would have a problem getting CoD on the Switch, not when the Witcher 3 is over there along with some others. It would probably be 30fps and at CRT resolutions, but so is Fortnight.

 

[FeralEcho]

Hmmm, who should I trust.

A body of business experts or someone random person on the Internet who uses caps to express how EMOTIONAL they are about this...

I was taking a dookie,gimme a break,emotions were high.

My point still stands though caps or not these experts you call them are a bunch of bafoons.Frankly I couldn't give less of shit If COD goes to Switch or not 1 cuz I own all 3 consoles and 2 I don't even play COD outside of the old PS3 Black Ops and MW games so I have no stake in this whatsoever but I am tired of hearing about these experts when they show time and time again they have nothing to do with the gaming industry.

 

[GHG]

This is a pretty dumb argument on the cma. This can be proven without a doubt by the running other xbox games via cloud.

The entire game also doesnt need to be installed at the same time. And there are 1 terabyte sd cards now. Im using one in a emulator box.

If the approval from cma doesn't happen it will be taken to court where facts will be more worthwhile.

Cloud is not "experiencing call of duty just as xbox and PlayStation users enjoy it".

 

[TLZ]

A 4 year port of Witcher 3 sold 700k copies in 3 months.
I’m also not sure you can describe Bayonetta 3 as ‘family friendly’ and it sold over a million.

it won’t sell anywhere near the amounts on the bigger consoles, but it should easily be profitable…not to mention IAP sales too

But you just proved with those numbers they don't really care. Compare those measly numbers to the games people buy Nintendo consoles for. And Switch proved and still proves Nintendo don't need the likes of COD.

 

[Ozriel]

Yep, until we actually see the terms of the deal, it's all futile. For all we know, it could be a similar statement like:

"Microsoft will bring* Call of Duty to Nintendo gamers."

*As long as Nintendo allows COD on Switch because COD will be available only through Game Pass xCloud on Nintendo.

Any deal Nintendo were that happy to sign would have been something meaningful, without conditions like that.

Not to mention the fact that a 10 year deal cannot be hinged on an ageing, soon to be replaced console.

Skepticism shouldn’t mean a complete abdication of common sense.

 

[TLZ]

Of course they did? That's what the Switch is.

Switch is 8th gen bud. Nothing about it says 9th.

 

[Dane]

COD has been a pretty hardware accesible game overall to have 60 FPS as standard on all platforms since 4, Activision had great ports on Wii that ran with lower fidelity and 30 FPS and were well received. It's a matter of sourcing to a competent team to work on it.

 

[Ozriel]

But you just proved with those numbers they don't really care. Compare those measly numbers to the games people buy Nintendo consoles for. And Switch proved and still proves Nintendo don't need the likes of COD.

Witcher 3 was a port of a (then) 4 year old game. And it still sold that well. How much better would a native version of a current game sell? Especially one from a franchise as popular as Call of Duty.

The only way to play COD on the move is via a mobile version with no crossplay. Or by running Windows on Steamdeck. A next gen portable console version will be well received.

It doesn’t have to sell crazy numbers, and Nintendo doesn’t need it. But they’ll certainly be very happy with the millions of dollars in royalties from the title.

 

[Saber]

Realistically, if MS signed a 10 year deal to support Nintendo's platforms, they have some idea about what comes after the Switch. This is what, the 6th year for Switch? Something new is surely coming from them and I would suspect that it would have to be at least as powerful as the X1/PS4 that CoD is already supported on. LOL Some real brainiacs on this panel.

What Microsoft "think" it will come and what Nintendo delivers are completely different things.
Nintendo was never about console powerhouses, flops or whatever. Different from what gaf keeps drooling and daydreaming, their focus are gimmicks.

And thats me saying it's already time for new console. But to think that Microsoft have an idea of what comes from them is silly.

 

[GHG]

Realistically, if MS signed a 10 year deal to support Nintendo's platforms, they have some idea about what comes after the Switch. This is what, the 6th year for Switch? Something new is surely coming from them and I would suspect that it would have to be at least as powerful as the X1/PS4 that CoD is already supported on. LOL Some real brainiacs on this panel.

Though I doubt they would have a problem getting CoD on the Switch, not when the Witcher 3 is over there along with some others. It would probably be 30fps and at CRT resolutions, but so is Fortnight.

So you want COD to be perpetually cross-gen? Why?

Typically after a couple of years into a new generation they move to next gen only.

Last gen it started with a game with features being cut for the previous generation of consoles and then they transitioned to current gen (at the time) only. This was the reason they cited:

The ambitious scope of the 1-4 player coop Campaign design of the PS4, Xbox One and PC versions could not be faithfully recreated on old generation hardware."

https://www.vg247.com/no-single-player-campaign-mode-for-black-ops-3-on-ps3-and-xbox-360

At some point certain games need to move on from older/less capable hardware. Considering what's been promised in the contract to Nintendo they won't be able to unless Nintendo come up with hardware that is at the very least on par with the current crop of next gen consoles.

 

[SportsFan581]

It isn't about my preference @ GHG just about reality. A few basic facts make this almost inevitable: 1). The Switch is a juggernaut and a direct successor likely will be as well 2). Businesses like growth see #1 3). CoD's competitors for mind share like Fortnight are already over there.

 

[adamsapple]

The hope is that the current Switch will not be the only Nintendo console for the next 10 years.

 

[Nautilus]

Switch is 8th gen bud. Nothing about it says 9th.

The Wii U was Nintendo's 8th gen console, my friend. The Switch is a 9th gen console.

 

[GHG]

It isn't about my preference @ GHG just about reality. A few basic facts make this almost inevitable: 1). The Switch is a juggernaut and a direct successor likely will be as well 2). Businesses like growth see #1 3). CoD's competitors for mind share like Fortnight are already over there.

If Activision believed that to be the case then they would already have a version on the switch. They looked into it but decided against it for technical reasons:

https://www.ruetir.com/2023/02/acti...ut-technical-limitations-prevented-it-ruetir/


Call of Duty is also already on mobile, so they have gamers who prefer portables covered to an extent, albeit a completely different version.

So I'm not clear on what a native switch or switch 2 version is hoping to achieve other than act as an anchor for the series moving forward.

 

[Kataploom]

That's non of their business, MS made a legally linking trait, it's MS business to know how to make it work

 

[SportsFan581]

If Activision believed that to be the case then they would already have a version on the switch. They looked into it but decided against it for technical reasons:

https://www.ruetir.com/2023/02/acti...ut-technical-limitations-prevented-it-ruetir/


Call of Duty is also already on mobile, so they have gamers who prefer portables covered to an extent, albeit a completely different version.

So I'm not clear on what a native switch or switch 2 version is hoping to achieve other than act as an anchor for the series moving forward.

All the more reason to believe that they are now looking beyond the current iteration of the Switch. But, still, 100m+ potential customers could probably make them reconsider.

 

[knocksky]

It'll be a low res, two cartridge affair (1 for the campaign and 1 for the mp) if they release it on the switch.

Unless of course regulators know more than actual devs

 

[GHG]

All the more reason to believe that they are now looking beyond the current iteration of the Switch. But, still, 100m+ potential customers could probably make them reconsider.

Whatever comes after the switch starts with a userbase of zero and as always in this industry nothing is promised.

It's a peculiar commitment for them to make, and rightly so, it's being regarded for what it is by regulators - posturing.

 

[Lunarorbit]

This was an issue 6 years ago when the switch came out. That's why big 3rd party studios don't make stuff for Nintendo as much as the other guys. It's a joke honestly at this point

 

[acm2000]

cloud works fine as long as your wifi isnt shit, plenty of examples of this on switch already

 

[SportsFan581]

Whatever comes after the switch starts with a userbase of zero and as always in this industry nothing is promised.

It's a peculiar commitment for them to make, and rightly so, it's being regarded for what it is by regulators - posturing.

Legally binding though, so, not posturing at all. The game developers decide what the target is, they could make Intel HD graphics the target if they chose.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

"with full feature and content parity - so they can experience COD just as Xbox and Playstation gamers enjoy COD"

They can get the same features and content by just releasing a cloud version, as I said.

Or do you consider 120FPS/4K/etc to be features or content? That will never happen on Switch.

 

[GHG]

Legally binding though, so, not posturing at all. The game developers decide what the target is, they could make Intel HD graphics the target if they chose.

Doesn't hold much water according to the CMA:

Furthermore, even though Microsoft’s deal with Nintendo is “legally binding“, it doesn’t certify Call of Duty will arrive on the platform.

And yes, of course the developers decide what the target is - if Activision wanted COD to be a boomer shooter targeting integrated graphics then they would already be doing so. Good luck making the money they have and continue to if they decided to go down that route though.

 

[NickFire]

Duh says everyone who owns a Switch and plays COD on a different console.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

How so? Are you excited to play COD at 340p 35fps and on wifi on your switch? Please elaborate.

I have an OLED, I don’t have to use WiFi

 

[SportsFan581]

Doesn't hold much water according to the CMA:



And yes, of course the developers decide what the target is - if Activision wanted COD to be a boomer shooter targeting integrated graphics then they would already be doing so. Good luck making the money they have and continue to if they decided to go down that route though.

Of course, but the decisions made yesterday don't necessarily dictate the choices you make tomorrow. 180s aren't that rare, some of them work and some of them don't.

Activision's old leadership didn't think CoD on Switch was ultimately worth it, the potential new leadership obviously does.

 

[GHG]

Of course, but the decisions made yesterday don't necessarily dictate the choices you make tomorrow. 180s aren't that rare, some of them work and some of them don't.

Activision's old leadership didn't think CoD on Switch was ultimately worth it, the potential new leadership obviously does.

And why do you think that is all of a sudden?

 

[dotnotbot]

They can get the same features and content by just releasing a cloud version, as I said.

Or do you consider 120FPS/4K/etc to be features or content? That will never happen on Switch.

I don't consider requiring constant internet connection to play singleplayer mode as a comparable experience to X/PS. Some people still have data caps and streaming eats up a lot.

And when it comes to multiplayer mode, it's one of the most fast paced games out there, so FPS and lag do matter a lot so I certainly wouldn't say Nintendo players "can experience COD just as Xbox and Playstation gamers enjoy COD".

 

[NickFire]

They can get the same features and content by just releasing a cloud version, as I said.

Or do you consider 120FPS/4K/etc to be features or content? That will never happen on Switch.

120 FPS is absolutely a feature. But in fairness 60 FPS is the floor and good enough for most people. Regardless, you will not be seeing 60 FPS in a graphically acceptable state via cloud. Not happening.

 

[poppabk]

And why do you think that is all of a sudden?

Because they want this deal to pass. It's okay for them to commit resources to a product with poor ROI if they want to try and help the deal through.

 

[justiceiro]

2 decades after n64 and Nintendo consoles still get short end of the stick because of storage. Some lessons are never learned, it seems.

 

[ZoukGalaxy]

Translation: "We won't bother with the Switch tech limits because, first, we're too lazy and then, even more importantly, it does not worth the time, effort and investment"

/sad_truth

 

[EverydayBeast]

Please allow yourself to play Modern Warfare Reflex if you have a Wii.

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

You'll have to walk around with an external HD

Lol, I can visualize that. Fashionable satchels for your hard drives.
That’s what the clouds for, though I wouldn’t expect to see anyone on the B train playing a round of COD.

 

[TexMex]

A cloud solution that MS provides? That would be even worse because it would strengthen MS Cloud gaming business and the CMA are already saying that MS can't buy Activision because it would strengthen their Cloud Gaming business.

Never even implied this. I’m saying that they don’t know what they’re reviewing because saying something like the Switch hardware can’t run COD is irrelevant given the fact that they would stream it and not run it natively.

 

[Tams]

Never even implied this. I’m saying that they don’t know what they’re reviewing because saying something like the Switch hardware can’t run COD is irrelevant given the fact that they would stream it and not run it natively.

For a first person shooter that is played competitively, the latency would offer a significantly inferior experience. Are you jumping on the Google 'negative latency' bullshit train?

Not that it matters. They saw right through Microsoft's plan.

 

[TexMex]

For a first person shooter that is played competitively, the latency would offer a significantly inferior experience. Are you jumping on the Google 'negative latency' bullshit train?

Not that it matters. They saw right through Microsoft's plan.

While I would also be skeptical, you are speculating that a product that doesn’t even exist yet runs poorly. You have no idea. I’m not going to definitively say that a product that currently only exists as an idea has poor performance. All I said was that of course it can not run natively, but that is obviously not their intent.

 

[NickFire]

While I would also be skeptical, you are speculating that a product that doesn’t even exist yet runs poorly. You have no idea. I’m not going to definitively say that a product that currently only exists as an idea has poor performance. All I said was that of course it can not run natively, but that is obviously not their intent.

The most speculative thing at all is the proposition that the product doesn't even exist yet IMO. Do you really think the annual release cycle involves entirely new games every year?

 

[TexMex]

The most speculative thing at all is the proposition that the product doesn't even exist yet IMO. Do you really think the annual release cycle involves entirely new games every year?

Literally said the first part in my own post.

Do I think an annual release cycle involves new games every year? Yes - that’s what annual release means. Also there has been a new COD almost every year for well over a decade at this point so I’m not sure why anyone would feel otherwise.

 

[NickFire]

Literally said the first part in my own post.

Do I think an annual release cycle involves new games every year? Yes - that’s what annual release means. Also there has been a new COD almost every year for well over a decade at this point so I’m not sure why anyone would feel otherwise.

I've been playing since pre-Modern Warfare (the original on 360). I do not believe they release entirely new games each year. New games for sure. Entirely new games no.

If you are suggesting an entirely new game, ground up, is going to ship within a few years, I hope you are right actually. But I just can't believe it without seeing it first.

 

[Astral Dog]

I just assume they meant it won't come until the next generation of Switch consoles(and with some cuts,depending on the game)

Its still safe to assume Call of Duty is gonna come out on Nintendo systems in some way, if they already signed a "deal" and shared it to the public.Nintendo doesn't have anything to lose here since the last time a Call of Duty game released was on the Wii/DS days

 

[TLZ]

The Wii U was Nintendo's 8th gen console, my friend. The Switch is a 9th gen console.

Eh.... I believe they cut that one's life short and released Switch in the same gen. I don't consider its hardware 9th gen. I think I did at the beginning but not anymore. So I'm looking forward to what actual 9th gen Nintendo hardware looks like.

 

[EN250]

Eh.... I believe they cut that one's life short and released Switch in the same gen. I don't consider its hardware 9th gen. I think I did at the beginning but not anymore. So I'm looking forward to what actual 9th gen Nintendo hardware looks like.

Nintendo left the power race with the GameCube, new HW releases for them are not about hardware relative to other players in the market, if that were the case, Switch would be placed in between 7th Gen and 8th Gen, since tech wise is better than X360-PS3 but worse than Xb1-PS4

 

[Foilz]

Whether or not the switch can run cod should have no bearing on the Ms deal. Should MS pay to upgrade the switch hardware?

 

[chromhound]

They could remaster the old COD or use the old engine lol

 

[Nautilus]

Eh.... I believe they cut that one's life short and released Switch in the same gen. I don't consider its hardware 9th gen. I think I did at the beginning but not anymore. So I'm looking forward to what actual 9th gen Nintendo hardware looks like.

With all due respect, it doesn't matter if you don't consider as such. The Switch is Nintendo' 9th gen system, as gen doesn't define how much power a system should have, will compete most of it's life against MS and Sony's 9th gen system.

Will be interesting to see what Nintendo brings to the table with the 10th gen's first system.

 

[Deerock71]

I don't give a shit what the Country Music Association thinks about how well the Switch can run Call of Duty. In fact, I think they should get back to fuggin' their cousin/aunt/sister, chuggin' their moonshine, and flossing their tooth.

 

[Raonak]

Trying to play a twitch shooter like COD over the cloud sounds like a latency nightmare

 

[TexMex]

I've been playing since pre-Modern Warfare (the original on 360). I do not believe they release entirely new games each year. New games for sure. Entirely new games no.

If you are suggesting an entirely new game, ground up, is going to ship within a few years, I hope you are right actually. But I just can't believe it without seeing it first.

I have to be misunderstanding what you mean then. With one exception, there has been a new Call of Duty every single year since 2005. I don’t know why that would change.

 

[M16]

Does the CMA think you just click compile and you have a switch version? By the time a port is made there will be new hardware.