Well as much as people want to believe other wise. The Switch is still not powerful enough to handle a lot of triple a games. Developers would have to highly optimize their games or make a special Switch version that has the same name but isn't the same game as what the ps4 and xbone get. (what EA is doing with fifa)
I was expecting an article questioning why Wii U games aren't being ported to the Switch, not one complaining that the weakest console of the current gen doesn't get ports of AAA games.
You buy Nintendo consoles for the exclusives, not for multiplatfrom games.
The system has been out 4 months, give it time
When/if the ports happen everybody will just throw a tantrum because insufficient graphix and nothing else matters but how many individual beard follicles you can render on gruff brown hair shootman.
[QUOTE=MissingGlitch;52443751]The Switch is still not powerful enough to handle a lot of triple a games.[/QUOTE]
It'd help if AAA studios didn't force their games to do more than consoles can even handle
[editline]7th July 2017[/editline]
I mean shit they're doing it willfully just to make the game look as pretty as possibly for marketing, at the cost of making games less playable
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;52444505]I was expecting an article questioning why Wii U games aren't being ported to the Switch, not one complaining that the weakest console of the current gen doesn't get ports of AAA games.
You buy Nintendo consoles for the exclusives, not for multiplatfrom games.[/QUOTE]
It's not like it hasn't happened before. The Wii got a decent amount of AAA releases, especially early on in it's life. It also wasn't uncommon at all to see the PS2 get games from the much stronger hardware.
The difference is that the Wii and PS2 were owned by everyone and their grandmother so it made a lot of sense to strike while the iron was hot. Activision was releasing Call of Duty games on the Wii all the way up to the Wii U's release.
While the Switch is doing very well, it's only been four months. Not really enough time to see if it'd be worth the effort of porting it.
[QUOTE=Reds;52445341]When/if the ports happen everybody will just throw a tantrum because insufficient graphix and nothing else matters but how many individual beard follicles you can render on gruff brown hair shootman.[/QUOTE]
I don't think the people who buy Nintendo consoles care too much about graphics.
Well, the fact that we have heard more about what the Switch won't have than what it will have gives some pretty negative implications in regards to the system's hardware specifications.
I still have to wonder if a traditional box would have worked better for Nintendo. At the very least, a system that can run The Witcher 3 on Ultra settings at a native 2160p30 would have the chops to handle PS5 games at 720p
Short of a full-on expensive gaming laptop the Switch is literally the most powerful handheld on the planet. The only thing that comes close to Nvidia's Tegra X1 is, believe it or not, their last generation Tegra K1.
Nintendo could only have made it more powerful if they produced an x86-based tablet and that would have been prohibitively expensive and even less power efficient than it already is.
The Switch is as powerful as a handheld can possibly be and you're still all bitching about it. If you want a PS4, get a PS4.
[QUOTE=gk99;52445782]I don't think the people who buy Nintendo consoles care too much about graphics.[/QUOTE]
While that's correct since power has never been a big point of Nintendo since Gamecube, it helps that Nintendo goes for artstyle>graphics. I do like when a game is prettier though. But since Nintendo still makes gorgeous games through their artstyle (BOTW, Mario Odyssey) it's alright with me.
oh and @topic: wtf, the console is only 4 months old. Why are there not 500 games for it already?!!?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
