• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (Read the staff posts before commenting!)

Reader mode
Goodtwin said:
There are only so many games Nintendo can realistically have lineup up and prepared for release. The Wii U was such a flop that it allowed them to recycle the bulk of Wii U's first party titles and release them on Switch. Nintendo did have a lot of brand new titles prepared for Switch, but if you were to remove all the Wii U ports, the release schedule would not have been nearly as consistent. Is it possible or reasonable to think that Nintendo can have a dozen first party games lined up for the first year on the market? I'm doubtful that they can. I also do not think they really need to have the same pacing they did with Switch in order for it to be successful. Third parties will be on board from the start this time, and while I do still believe that it is up to Nintendo to make sure the system gets off to a great start, it will really only take a few high profile games to make that happen. Secure a few high profile third party games for the first year, something like Elden Ring and Red Dead Redemption 2 would be perfect. The flood of third party ports is basically certainty at this point. Switch has been a smash success and third parties wont be playing the wait and see game this time.

Assuming Nintendo was planning for a 2024 release and has decided to push that back to March 2025, we are looking at a roughly six month delay. Sort of inconsequential when we consider games generally take many years to develop, but it does move up their entire lineup of games being developed by six months. Perhaps Nintendo has six to ten games currently in development for SNG all at various stages of development. If they were to launch the system in 2024, only five of them would be done and ready to ship within the first eighteen months on the market, requiring them to space them out accordingly. By releasing six months later than originally planned, these same five titles will all release within twelve months of launch. Basically this allows them to create a stacked condensed lineup of big hitters in the first year on the market.

Another possibility is that Nintendo sees an opportunity to squeeze every last drop out of the Switch before moving on to the successor and because Switch has still been selling well, they feel confident they can do this without any negative consequences for the new hardware. Regardless if SNG launches in late 2024 or in early 2025, this will not have a meaningful impact on the success of that new platform.
Click to expand...

There's also COVID to unfortunately factor in, for a game launching in fall 2024, these days it probably would have to have begun development around 2020/2021, which is smack dab in the middle of offices being shut down.

That probably unfortunately played a role as Nintendo didn't have their dev teams in their offices working how they normally would work and for a critical generational leap, that probably didn't help at all. The early stages of Switch 2 software development was likely impacted and given Nintendo was probably already looking at some time period to adjust to a big jump in performance, all of that could easily have put them behind 8-12+ months.
 
Last edited:
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
"Dragon's Dogma 2 also offers ray tracing as a graphics option, but other than mildly improving the ambient lighting, the hit to the performance isn't really worth it. For example, with the RTX 4070 Ti, the average fps drop was around 20% without any upscaling, which is pretty good and it's a smaller drop in the city area, but you'll probably not want to bother with it."

Another game with no interesting use of RT.

www.pcgamer.com

Dragon's Dogma 2 performance analysis: It'll take everything your PC has and still want more

I hope you have a top-end CPU and GPU because you're really going to need them.
www.pcgamer.com www.pcgamer.com

Overall, assuming that the MH Wilds trailer is accurate for being an open world game with many monsters on screen with AI routines, it's not looking good for the Switch 2.

image.png
Click to expand...
I’m hoping it’s just bad optimisation, but it seems it’s CPU problem. Also I’m at awed that the ps5 doesn’t have a capped 30fps option. I’m curious how the Series S will run.

(I don’t mind 30fps, been playing rebirth, since performance mode consistently dropped)

Like that’s why I’m overly optimistic that Nintendo devs will utilise Ray tracing the best out of the big three, because of their stylised games, that are timeless.
 
0
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
"Dragon's Dogma 2 also offers ray tracing as a graphics option, but other than mildly improving the ambient lighting, the hit to the performance isn't really worth it. For example, with the RTX 4070 Ti, the average fps drop was around 20% without any upscaling, which is pretty good and it's a smaller drop in the city area, but you'll probably not want to bother with it."

Another game with no interesting use of RT.

www.pcgamer.com

Dragon's Dogma 2 performance analysis: It'll take everything your PC has and still want more

I hope you have a top-end CPU and GPU because you're really going to need them.
www.pcgamer.com www.pcgamer.com

Overall, assuming that the MH Wilds trailer is accurate for being an open world game with many monsters on screen with AI routines, it's not looking good for the Switch 2.

image.png
Click to expand...

Looking at the PC hardware it even struggles on, this isn't a case of "too demanding".

It's a case of "we do the optimization after launch".
 
Bonejack said:
Looking at the PC hardware it even struggles on, this isn't a case of "too demanding".

It's a case of "we do the optimization after launch".
Click to expand...

This game was in development for like 5 years, its audience is mostly on PC, and PC gamers get furious about games that run at less than 60, I don't think it was a strategy to wait until after release to optimize the CPU usage, lol.

Me, a smart guy, waiting until my Steam reviews are 60% negative before optimizing my game (all of my fans are on Steam).
 
Kevin said:
I have not played anything on Switch in a long time. 😄

Just waiting to move on. Seeing how slow these forums are these days, I think a lot of people are feeling the same way. Very little news of any kind. I think things will pick up if we get some juicy rumors or a General Direct.
Click to expand...
You dont have a backlog to start playing on switch? I have so many im almost thankful its a slow year in some ways lol
 
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
"Dragon's Dogma 2 also offers ray tracing as a graphics option, but other than mildly improving the ambient lighting, the hit to the performance isn't really worth it. For example, with the RTX 4070 Ti, the average fps drop was around 20% without any upscaling, which is pretty good and it's a smaller drop in the city area, but you'll probably not want to bother with it."

Another game with no interesting use of RT.

www.pcgamer.com

Dragon's Dogma 2 performance analysis: It'll take everything your PC has and still want more

I hope you have a top-end CPU and GPU because you're really going to need them.
www.pcgamer.com www.pcgamer.com

Overall, assuming that the MH Wilds trailer is accurate for being an open world game with many monsters on screen with AI routines, it's not looking good for the Switch 2.

image.png
Click to expand...
I think it'll largely depend on how MH Wild's world is constructed. If it's World But Bigger™, I can't imagine it being as bad as Dragon's Dogma 2. But if all of the different areas are now interconnected like a proper open world, it'll be pretty dicey.
 
Machrider said:
There's also COVID to unfortunately factor in, for a game launching in fall 2024, these days it probably would have to have begun development around 2020/2021, which is smack dab in the middle of offices being shut down.

That probably unfortunately played a role as Nintendo didn't have their dev teams in their offices working how they normally would work and for a critical generational leap, that probably didn't help at all.
Click to expand...
Yea Covid slowed down so many games. The farther we get away from covid the more titles will be released at a more consecutive time.
 
lattjeful said:
I think it'll largely depend on how MH Wild's world is constructed. If it's World But Bigger™, I can't imagine it being as bad as Dragon's Dogma 2. But if all of the different areas are now interconnected like a proper open world, it'll be pretty dicey.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I mean, it obviously depends.

But if these are large areas with a lot of monster AI routines that can interact, it's looking very dicey.
 
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Overall, assuming that the MH Wilds trailer is accurate for being an open world game with many monsters on screen with AI routines, it's not looking good for the Switch 2.
Click to expand...
"Lots of monsters onscreen with AI routines" is not remotely comparable to the demands DD2 is making on CPU. The demands of ambient wildlife and the large monsters in a MH game are a totally different use case than a game that is trying to run a world simulation for lots of humanoid characters that have to behave reasonably convincingly, along with 3 AI companions at all times - that also has to deliver an action game with lots of real-time physics objects. This is just baseless scaremongering.
 
Bonejack said:
Do you really want to tell me that SQEX would release a Mana game and have no intentions to have a version for the successor of the system ready where the last few Mana games sold best?

Really?



Realistically, how many games does Nintendo need? Remember the console isn't free, so it's not like people have unlimited budget for launch month and the month(s) after.

If they would manage to have a 3D Mario, one or two smaller game(s) and a "4K port" of one of their evergreens ready for the first 2-3 months, i'd say that's enough if there's also 3rd party games available.

I doubt that situation's so dire that there wouldn't even something from the above be ready for a 2024 release. If that were the case, something went HORRIBLY wrong at their dev teams. But that wouldn't just happen suddenly, so even if this was the case, they could've re-adjusted some of their recent and upcoming releases accordingly.
Click to expand...
My interpretation is not that Nintendo software for release is not ready, i think they want to be in a position where they can fill out the first year with regular releases of big and middle sized first party releases, maybe 3D Mario is ready for launch but right now all the titles that are planned for release the first year can only be ready by delaying the system to March 2025. And maybe Nintendo is so cautious because they realize that unlike Sony and Microsoft they can't be saved by third party releases if they have too many blank months the first year of the Switch 2. Because 1: Many of the third party releases on the Switch 2 launch year will be ports of PS4 gen games and 2: Unclear how many day and date releases of big, new third party titles will come out the first year of the Switch 2. So that means that they have to make sure they have a good release schedule for the first party releases during the launch year of Switch 2.
 
Last edited:
Danny said:
My interpretation is not that Nintendo software for release is not ready, i think they want to be in a position where they can fill out the first year with regular releases of big and middle sized first party releases, maybe 3D Mario is ready for launch but right now all the titles that are planned for release the first year can only be ready by delaying the system to March 2025. And maybe Nintendo is so cautious because they realize that unlike Sony and Microsoft they can't be saved by third party releases if they have too many blank months the first year of the Switch 2. Because 1: Many of the third party releases on the Switch 2 year 1 will be ports of PS4 gen games and 2: Unclear how many day and date releases of big, new third party titles will come out the first year of the Switch 2. So that means that they have to make sure they have a good release schedule for the first party releases year 1 of Switch 2.
Click to expand...
I would take it as Nintendo not really having other businesses to pull them out of the fire if Switch 2 has issues. MS definitely has other businesses. Sony has other businesses.
 
I wouldn't be that stunned too if the Mario movie put some pressure on the Mario 3D team to have to bring things like Mario's animations up a notch.

The movie was a massive success, probably beyond Nintendo's expectations, not that hard to think the game developers probably looked at it and felt they had to step their game up.
 
ItsukaKasuga said:
i just remember something i wanted to ask, is there a comparasion that i can read between p5 cpu and what we expect for the new switch?
Click to expand...
Depends on what you want to know? Inserting a post of my own here.

oldpuck said:
You were asking about comparison to consoles. It's hard to compare these things, the best bet we've got is Geekbench benchmarks which are halfway decent, and pretty ubiquitous, but there aren't any benchmarks of the exact Switch 2 config, so we can only get close. For Geekbench scores, higher is better. Single threaded benchmarks are generally more reliable, and better reflect how games use the CPU.

Single core/Multi-core Geekbench Scores
Switch: 144/409
Xbox One X: 248/1202
Intel Celeron G3930: 637/1134

Orin NX, standing in for Switch 2: 864/4445
Xbox Series X: 1306/7826
Intel Core i5-11400: 1708/5943

For Reasons(tm), we don't have Playstation numbers, or the other variants of the Xbox. Also note that Orin NX probably under-estimates the Switch 2 performance, but probably not by leaps and bounds.

I've also included the most popular gaming desktop CPUs from 2017 and 2023, according to Steam. The Xbox One/PS4 CPU was notoriously crappy, which is why even the little mobile chip with only 4 cores in the Switch is in decent shape relative to it, but it had such a huge gap relative to desktops at the time.
Click to expand...
 
lattjeful said:
Oh 100%. Don't get me wrong, I understand the limitations with doing a Pro model, especially on the CPU side. Just dubious re: the raytracing uplift when a big part of RT won't be getting much improvement on the hardware side.
Click to expand...
Well, from what I could read from the documents, the Pro will bring dedicated RT plus upscaling hardware to the table just like the future Switch 2. All RT workloads on console have been highly CPU dependent as a result (which in turn leaks over to PC ports), this will change if the Pro's implementation becomes the leading implementation.
 
Danny said:
My interpretation is not that Nintendo software for release is not ready, i think they want to be in a position where they can fill out the first year with regular releases of big and middle sized first party releases, maybe 3D Mario is ready for launch but right now all the titles that are planned for release the first year can only be ready by delaying the system to March 2025. And maybe Nintendo is so cautious because they realize that unlike Sony and Microsoft they can't be saved by third party releases if they have too many blank months the first year of the Switch 2. Because 1: Many of the third party releases on the Switch 2 launch year will be ports of PS4 gen games and 2: Unclear how many day and date releases of big, new third party titles will come out the first year of the Switch 2. So that means that they have to make sure they have a good release schedule for the first party releases during the launch year of Switch 2.
Click to expand...

Well, there's other ways they could handle this. For example, do the middle-ground and have ~ 6-7 months planned for releases and actually do give the 3rds the benefit of trust again.

Though we also would have to argue about what Nintendo feels is "releasable" and what not. Is it simply the game isn't done with dev? As in "not in a stable playable state"? Then i'd argue that ~ 3 months might not be enough to bring a game into such a state. At least not with optimization and solid QA work.
Is it just "it's done, stable playable, but we feel like we could do some more QA" then we're at the "Indiana Jones" point where he stands in front of the golden idol and is unsure wether or not he should do the swap of the idol and the weight-bag. Sometimes you gotta make the compromise of risking a few hiccups in a game, of course nothing game-breaking. I hope Nintendo understands that not even their own games can all be TotK'd in terms of QA and optimization.

At one point, we go from "wanting to secure a solid stream of game releases" into "too afraid of doing something for their own good".

For the sake of discussion, lets take some of the rumored games from the various leakers (the legit ones, mind you). There's actually some games listed that are upcoming releases, so a 2024 ReDraketed release could actually mean day-and-date for once. Of course, there will be enough late ports, though i would argue that if we're talking about a game that released end of 2023 or during 2024, it's not that much of a late/old port.
The delay sure means that games that were possible day-and-date releases with the other platforms now slip into a "late" port timeframe.
 
Some games/game engines just hit the CPU harder than others, even if there doesn't appear to be anything that should be pegging it. If Dragons Dogma 2 is stalling out on the CPU, its likely poor optimization or poor resource management by the developer. The Ryzen CPU's in the PS5 and Series consoles absolutely trounce the Jaguar cores in the PS4/Xbox One, and yet one of the most exceptional game worlds ever created with RDR2 runs perfectly fine on those Jaguar cores. Then we have Zelda BotW and TotK that run on three A57 CPU cores and implement one of the finest open world with a high level physics system.

You could look at Gotham Knights and blame its performance on the CPU's I guess, but that would be ignoring the fact that the game makes poor use of multi threading and its generally a single thread that is maxed out, causing the performance issues. I suppose if the argument is that the CPU bottleneck in theses specific games would make it a tough port to SNG, then yea, I can agree with that. If its extremely heavy on a single thread on those Ryzen cores, it would certainly choke the A78C cores. However, if you are arguing that this is the new normal and all games will hit the CPU in this same way, I think you are extrapolating a generalization from a few fringe cases. Most games will still be primarily GPU bound and that doesn't appear to be changing any time soon. We can dog on those Jaguar CPU cores all we want, but it honestly forced developers to get better at multi threading.
 
Steve said:
I'm kinda surprised if won't have a big boost in FPS with the ps5 pro, i would have thought it being the selling point, especially with GTA 6 coming right around the corner.
Click to expand...
If the CPU change is nothing/minimal as it seems, then nothing that was CPU limited will be able to gain significant frames. And if it wasn't CPU-limited, it's already been pretty common for games to have Performance modes to reach those higher frame rates with lower graphical settings. The Pro will essentially allow Performance level frame rate, with higher quality frames.
 
0
Goodtwin said:
Some games/game engines just hit the CPU harder than others, even if there doesn't appear to be anything that should be pegging it. If Dragons Dogma 2 is stalling out on the CPU, its likely poor optimization or poor resource management by the developer. The Ryzen CPU's in the PS5 and Series consoles absolutely trounce the Jaguar cores in the PS4/Xbox One, and yet one of the most exceptional game worlds ever created with RDR2 runs perfectly fine on those Jaguar cores. Then we have Zelda BotW and TotK that run on three A57 CPU cores and implement one of the finest open world with a high level physics system.
Click to expand...
Or...or... we could take the developer at their word when they explicitly say that the game is intensive on older CPUs due to the nature of what they're simulating for the player and large numbers of NPCs in a dynamic world, something that is borne out by not only multiple sources doing performance analysis thus far but by literally anyone with understanding of CPU/GPU load observing the game and where it has difficulties?

RDR2 is not offering DD2's level of simulation, and BotW/TotK's performance issues (outside of alpha effects) directly relate to the same kind of physical simulation DD2 is offering, but with DD2 implementing them on a larger scale with higher fidelity.
 
Machrider said:
I wouldn't be that stunned too if the Mario movie put some pressure on the Mario 3D team to have to bring things like Mario's animations up a notch.

The movie was a massive success, probably beyond Nintendo's expectations, not that hard to think the game developers probably looked at it and felt they had to step their game up.
Click to expand...
I mean Mario game's have always had top notch animaton even before the movie. Odyssey, Luigis Mansion 3 and Strikers Battle League are only some of the examples
 
Bonejack said:
Well, there's other ways they could handle this. For example, do the middle-ground and have ~ 6-7 months planned for releases and actually do give the 3rds the benefit of trust again.

Though we also would have to argue about what Nintendo feels is "releasable" and what not. Is it simply the game isn't done with dev? As in "not in a stable playable state"? Then i'd argue that ~ 3 months might not be enough to bring a game into such a state. At least not with optimization and solid QA work.
Is it just "it's done, stable playable, but we feel like we could do some more QA" then we're at the "Indiana Jones" point where he stands in front of the golden idol and is unsure wether or not he should do the swap of the idol and the weight-bag. Sometimes you gotta make the compromise of risking a few hiccups in a game, of course nothing game-breaking. I hope Nintendo understands that not even their own games can all be TotK'd in terms of QA and optimization.

At one point, we go from "wanting to secure a solid stream of game releases" into "too afraid of doing something for their own good".

For the sake of discussion, lets take some of the rumored games from the various leakers (the legit ones, mind you). There's actually some games listed that are upcoming releases, so a 2024 ReDraketed release could actually mean day-and-date for once. Of course, there will be enough late ports, though i would argue that if we're talking about a game that released end of 2023 or during 2024, it's not that much of a late/old port.
The delay sure means that games that were possible day-and-date releases with the other platforms now slip into a "late" port timeframe.
Click to expand...
I agree with many of your points, i think a point to consider is that Nintendo has never forgotten the Wii U days even though they have now lived through the Switch golden age for the company, that probably means that they are extremely concious that they can't take success for granted. Nintendo unlike Sony have not only known major console successes but also major console failures and disappointments. That could lead them to be extremely careful about both launch games and launch window games, because they want to do everything they can to get as much momentum they can into the Switch 2.

Many fans consider Switch 2 nothing but a guaranteed slamdunk success, but i don't think Nintendo higher ups think its a slamdunk at all, in fact they may even wonder how an iterative Switch 2 that is only more powerful but also cost more money than Switch 1 will be recieved by the average consumers, so that probably drives them into wanting as many high quality games during the launch year as possible for the Switch 2. And for a company like Nintendo that has gaming software and hardware sales as their core business it makes sense that they are more careful than their competitors on the market because they have many other business ventures outside gaming, while for Nintendo if Switch 2 fails the entire company and its core business fails.
 
0
MP! said:
510wtj.jpg


at least for first party launch day
Click to expand...
While BOTW was cross gen, Nintendo did publish three titles on day one, with BOTW, 1-2 Switch and Snipperclips.

Honestly I kind of hope the next launch is similar. Major first party game, wacky multiplayer title, minor third party/outsourced puzzler published by Nintendo.
 
oldpuck said:
Depends on what you want to know? Inserting a post of my own here.
Click to expand...
thanks for the info, i just wanted to see if there was something i could compare in performance, since now is looking like a lot of games demand the cpu of consoles i wanted to get a better picture of how the switch 2 could work around things
 
Machrider said:
I wouldn't be that stunned too if the Mario movie put some pressure on the Mario 3D team to have to bring things like Mario's animations up a notch.

The movie was a massive success, probably beyond Nintendo's expectations, not that hard to think the game developers probably looked at it and felt they had to step their game up.
Click to expand...
I believe they have been already doing that before the success the movie. The 3D Mario games already had good animation, and Mario Wonder was a significant jump over the NMB series.
 
ItsukaKasuga said:
thanks for the info, i just wanted to see if there was something i could compare in performance, since now is looking like a lot of games demand the cpu of consoles i wanted to get a better picture of how the switch 2 could work around things
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, there are no systems out there with the Switch 2's CPU setup that also play games. So there is no real good test for that. And obviously there are some major unknowns on the CPU, like clock speed or cache size.

"Weak" relative to the consoles, "very weak" relative to the PC market. "Strongish" relative to the tablet, mobile space. That seems like a reasonable bet
 
SirArthur said:
So the Star Wars multiplayer was upgraded to UE5, I did not even know it was in UE to beginning with. The lighting looks much better. Still no release date
Click to expand...
it wasn't cancelled? Sorry I just feel like I have heard about so many cancelled Star Wars projects these days I get mixed up
 
KarlRemarx said:
Or...or... we could take the developer at their word when they explicitly say that the game is intensive on older CPUs due to the nature of what they're simulating for the player and large numbers of NPCs in a dynamic world, something that is borne out by not only multiple sources doing performance analysis thus far but by literally anyone with understanding of CPU/GPU load observing the game and where it has difficulties?

RDR2 is not offering DD2's level of simulation, and BotW/TotK's performance issues (outside of alpha effects) directly relate to the same kind of physical simulation DD2 is offering, but with DD2 implementing them on a larger scale with higher fidelity.
Click to expand...


Ill wait for the performance test to roll out, but unless we are seeing multiple CPU cores maxed out, then it is just another example of the game not being properly multi threaded. If a game is not properly multi threaded, it is inherently not taking full advantage of the hardware and that is a software problem, not the hardware. Lets assume that it is indeed well optimized making great use of lots of threads but is still seeing performance problems, this is still a software problem because the developer did not manage their resources well enough to hit the target framerate.

I'm not denying that DD2 is doing more than RDR2, but is it doing 10-15x as much? That is the type of overhead the Ryzen cores have over the Jaguar cores. BotW and TotK are entirely GPU/memory bandwidth limited. I have seen no examples of the game dropping frames because the CPU is maxed out. Again, its easy to see that DD2 is doing more than those games, but it was also targeting hardware that has at least 15x the CPU performance.

Its entirely possible to be CPU limited and also have poor CPU utilization. That is what happened with Gotham Knights and time will tell if that is what is happening in DD2.
 
oldpuck said:
Unfortunately, there are no systems out there with the Switch 2's CPU setup that also play games. So there is no real good test for that. And obviously there are some major unknowns on the CPU, like clock speed or cache size.

"Weak" relative to the consoles, "very weak" relative to the PC market. "Strongish" relative to the tablet, mobile space. That seems like a reasonable bet
Click to expand...
Ohh ok, thanks for the reply puck
 
Lugia667 said:
it wasn't cancelled? Sorry I just feel like I have heard about so many cancelled Star Wars projects these days I get mixed up
Click to expand...
I dont blame you, I also thought that at this point just can it lol. But yeah Star Wars Hunters seems to be alive, the eshop just says 2024.
 
Lugia667 said:
again if the system sells, they will come. This ain't the 90s anymore you can't really avoid platforms due to internal pettiness
Click to expand...
This especially; even Sony and Microsoft are realizing they need to expand their reach if they want to make money back on their AAAA games.

Microsoft is only starting to open the floodgates (they said nothing else was coming to Switch after Cuphead, Hellblade, and both Ori games; and now they got four coming out to Switch (and Switch 2, if rumours are to be believed) and PS5. Sony is slowly porting games to PC, and for contractual reasons has MLB The Show on Switch too.

Switch 2 just needs to sell, and for better and for worse Nintendo knows this too when they keep internally delaying this console for supposedly improved gains as opposed to launching sooner.

fwd-bwd said:
Hidden content is only available for registered users. Sharing it outside of Famiboards is subject to moderation.
Click to expand...
Hidden content is only available for registered users. Sharing it outside of Famiboards is subject to moderation.
 
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Yeah, I mean, it obviously depends.

But if these are large areas with a lot of monster AI routines that can interact, it's looking very dicey.
Click to expand...

It’s like this with every game. “Switch 2 probably cannot run this game, it probably cannot run that game”

Maybe Nintendo shouldn’t bother releasing Switch 2, because probably no games will run on the hardware
 
Hermii said:
Yep. The Switch 1 should have thought us there's very few games a dedicated team can't get running on much weaker hardware
Click to expand...
Pretty much why the most successful ports for the Switch were competently made, like Skyrim, Witcher 3, Doom and Nier automata and dragon quest 11

If studios only want to develop lazily made ports, then people won’t want to buy and get the game. It’s as simple as that. So hopefully this time around developers won’t force a port and for example dragon dogma 2 isn’t possible, then that’s that.

But maybe I’m miss reading your statement since English is my third language sadly.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this staff post before posting.

Furthermore, according to this follow-up post, all off-topic chat will be moderated.
Last edited:


Back
Top Bottom