redmetal86
Member
Wow, the AI actually learned human emotions.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Fifa Switch will be reportedly based off the PS3/360 versions
- Thread starter Poetic.Injustice
- Start date
Wow, the AI actually learned human emotions.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
...at half the framerate and half the player count as the XboxOne and PS4 with universally lower quality assets. And Battlefield (4 and Hardline) is still the only FB3 game that released on PS360. DICE have made steady improvements to the engine that they don't feel are compatible with last gen.
The truth is that it's not EA's job to make Nintendo hardware. It sucks that it's (reportedly) last-gen's FIFA, but if Nintendo have made last-gen hardware then how can you blame EA for not being able to port their current-gen version?
EA as a company is incredibly shady, but this isn't a case of EA execs rubbing their hands together and thinking "Let's screw Nintendo over!". It's Nintendo's responsibility to create a platform that can host third-party games, and as we find out more about the Switch, we're discovering that the platform cannot hang with current-gen.
Excellent post.
EA as a company is incredibly shady, but this isn't a case of EA execs rubbing their hands together and thinking "Let's screw Nintendo over!". It's Nintendo's responsibility to create a platform that can host third-party games, and as we find out more about the Switch, we're discovering that the platform cannot hang with current-gen.
Excellent post.
Dragon Age Inquisition too, but that version was also inferior.
GuitarGuruu
Member
Seriously I don't know why anyone expected anything else from EA.
MrS
Banned
Nintendo are without blame, I presume?
This is simply not true. I tell you what, I'll make a shitty ass game and then blame Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft because they made shitty hardware so my game couldn't be good! Awesome.
For making EA's game? Sure. Blame Nintendo!
I would think that them taking the PS3/360 version and porting it up for Switch would result in a better version of the game than them taking the PS4/XB1 version and porting it down for Switch. I'm no game developer though.
But since none of this has been confirmed, we should probably wait until they actually show it before passing any judgement.
But since none of this has been confirmed, we should probably wait until they actually show it before passing any judgement.
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
How is it EA's fault that the Switch is too underpowered to run current-gen FIFA?
MrS
Banned
Sony's and Microsoft's hardware isn't shitty compared to Nintendo's. That's the point. Nintendo's new hardware doesn't match the current console standard and is closer to 'last-gen', hence why it gets a port of a last-gen FIFA game. Your ire is misplaced - if you want a good version of FIFA, go buy a PS4 or X1 because the versions released on those platforms wouldn't work on Switch.
Reporting facts = hate?
but didn't developers say it was easy to port to Switch
Well, isn't it the developers fault when new PC games don't run well on really old PC's?
Sho_Nuff82
Member
A few GAF insiders, but as far as I know, no one working on actual games.
And EA is porting to Switch, the most sensible possible way; an enhanced port of FIFA 18 PS360.
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
If they were specifically targeting those platforms, sure. But there's a massive difference between designing a game for a closed console and an open PC, where any number of variables can be changed by the user to affect how a game runs.
But you already know this, I'm sure. Which begs the question: What's your point?
wondermega
Member
I'm not sure what people in this thread want. Should EA / other similar profile developers spend the time and money to build new engines to specifically support switch? Is there any other loophole would enable them to get around the look of "well there's no effort here it's just a dated port, sent to die." That makes zero sense.
Politically EA and company are just supporting Nintendo cause of what, only politics then? Buddies for decades? At what point do they draw a line and say "we simply don't want to waste time and money giving your platform any kind of support.." This feels like it's barely a step away from that already. Trying to give a little face time, and call it a day.
On the other end of it does Nintendo really even care anyway? It feels like they are torn, like they don't really know what they want to be. "Customers first," but then they are very stubborn "the customers will want what we tell them they will want.." Hmm ok. Just go back to not trying to compete then, and support your console yourself for another generation. Why even bother with this facade, it just makes everyone look bad.
Politically EA and company are just supporting Nintendo cause of what, only politics then? Buddies for decades? At what point do they draw a line and say "we simply don't want to waste time and money giving your platform any kind of support.." This feels like it's barely a step away from that already. Trying to give a little face time, and call it a day.
On the other end of it does Nintendo really even care anyway? It feels like they are torn, like they don't really know what they want to be. "Customers first," but then they are very stubborn "the customers will want what we tell them they will want.." Hmm ok. Just go back to not trying to compete then, and support your console yourself for another generation. Why even bother with this facade, it just makes everyone look bad.
That's not the point. You're giving EA a pass for making a crappy version of the game. I personally don't care about FIFA and haven't purchased an EA game in many years. What bothers me is that people are quick to blame others for their own failings. In this case, EA making a crappy version of the game and players saying it's okay because of Nintendo (or Sony, or Microsoft). That's not how this works.
I want to be able to get a pass for making a shitty game because of the manufacturer's hardware. Oh, I made a shitty game on the PS4? Well, it's not my fault because Sony's hardware isn't that good so that's why it ended up being a bad game. Heh, it's totally ridiculous. That's just not how development works. Put the blame where it belongs, and that's solely on EA. They made the game, it's their fault if it ends up being bad. It's as simple as that.
EA doesn't want to put any effort into this game? Fine. Then as a consumer, we don't have to give them any money.
Oh, and sure, consumers can buy the game on the PS4 or Xbox One. That's not really the issue, though. We're talking about the NS version and why someone should buy that game. If the answer is, "we shouldn't", then EA has failed. We, as gamers, shouldn't want X or Y versions of games to fail. I want to see games succeed and players of any version of whatever game to feel satisfied. For this, software developers really need to be held accountable for what they release. This includes myself (I'm also making a game). As a developer, I have complete control over the quality of what I produce. Just like EA, Nintendo, Sony, Bethesda, etc. do. When we push out poor games this should reflect on us, not someone else.
That's true, but if the game runs bad, then the developer doesn't get a pass. People will complain that the game doesn't run well, and they don't blame the hardware manufacturer for that failing. Again, the final product is determined by the developer. They decide when and what to release. If they release crap, then they should be called out on it.
TreasureHunterG
Banned
A port of Demon's Souls would melt Switchmaybe
Could the same game that's on PS4 and X1 be ported to Switch? Would it work properly? Would it look the same? Look deep within yourself and you will find the answer.
Has anything that looks like BF1 been created with UE4?
EA when nobody buys FIFA 13 on Switch:
They make a fuckton of cash from FIFA on X1 and PS4. Switch owners don't wanna buy it? No problem.
Unless you have technical evidence that Switch can't run Frostbite, you're all talk and basing yourself on assumptions.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
I think his point is that if you can't get The Witcher 3 to run well on your 4870 from 2008 without dialing down all of the graphics, you can either whine about it on the official forums, or buy a modern video card.
How is this so black and white for you? The PS360 versions of FIFA (or Battlefield) aren't "crappy". They just pale I'm comparison to the versions on hardware that suits the developer's vision.
An enhanced port of the 360 version of FIFA 18 would still be a good game. It would just still be inferior to the modern versions, because these are physical boxes with real world limitations, not hopium stations run on magic beans.
Just because it's easy does not mean it's worth it.
Would it be worth it to port FF15 shitty engine (great game though) to switch?
But if you can't get the game to run on a 2016 or 2017 card, then who do you blame then? Minimum requirements are there to give the user some idea of whether or not their game will run. If you meet these requirements and the game doesn't run well, then that's on the developer.
This is also true. But it's been said since the beginning, that what will keep games from coming out on the NS isn't hardware, but whether or not companies feel it's financially viable. If they think it's worth doing, they'll do it. The hardware isn't really an issue.
You're right. The final game COULD be good and we should leave that possibility open. I apologize for making that assumption and I'll dial that back a bit. However, my point is still the same. EA is responsible for EA's game. No one else made it but them. Whether the game is good or not rests 100% on their shoulders. That's all I'm trying to get at. Blaming anyone else for this just isn't right.
killatopak
Gold Member
lol
Sho_Nuff82
Member
According to whom?
I feel like I've had this debate the last three console generations. And it mostly stems from insiders poisoning the minds of fans with promises that weak hardware will somehow overcome its on-paper limitations and make every game possible. It won't. It can't.
As for your first point, developers have consistently told Nintendo fans what their "minimum requirements" are in the console space, people just choose to ignore them. EA said in very plain language back in 2012 that the Wii U was "not a next gen console". With that knowledge, why do people keep blaming the developers?
Yes it can be. Just because they can get a game engine running does not mean it would be in a state where they can actually release it as a product. For instance I am sure they could get the FF15 engine running eventually but at what costs? Eventually it would be so downgraded that it would be useless as a product.
Killer Queen
Banned
Can't wait to pay full price to play Dark Souls 1 in its released form
6 years later!!!
6 years later!!!
Well with FIFA its pretty simple. FIFA is a huge global moneymaker and an evergreen title. so globally using your contractually obligated port to bring your universal engine over is just smart buisness since you can write the costs of porting Frostbyte as a sunk cost and EA would get to enjoy the flexibility of a reduced barrier of entry to potentially profitable switch games.
Without knowing the Tech details its hard to speculate how a Frostbyte game would run on the switch. But we know the CPU is a modern maxwell chip, and likely isnt the issue after the WiiUs CPU was so problematic.
The GPU is the real issue and honestly i doubt Frostbyte would run better then 720p checkerboard (360p) on the Switch with reduced draw distances as a portable.(given the rumoured specs) But consumers would rather know the limitations of the Switch straight up and be given an informed choice, then have their insulted by a corporation (EA) Acting against their (EAs) best interests due to a poor buisness relationship with Nintendo
Who knows. Maybe an essentially 360p game with modern effects wont look so bad on a 720p screen
Edit
Nintendo obviously should have done better. They needed to be in the 450-800Gflop range to be viable with this concept and they arent. (A recent iphone has a 520Gflop gpu. Thats the standard in the mobile space now)
However poor hardware doesnt excuse EAs action in this case.
I'm working on my own game right now on 4 different platforms. I understand the difficulties in trying to get good performance out of hardware at different power levels. I do make it a point to run my game in multiple configurations. I have a low spec PC/Mac and a mid range machine that I use to test as well. I also have a Wii U kit that I use to port to the Wii U. Here's the thing, I understand completely what the challenges of this are. But at the end of the day, when my game comes out, I am the sole person responsible for how well all versions run (or don't run). Sure, I could say, "The Wii U version runs like crap because Nintendo made shitty hardware." But that's not the reality of it. I decided to do this, and I alone am responsible for the outcome. This is true of all people making software on whatever platform they choose. If my best effort isn't going to bear fruit, then I can either accept this and release it anyway, or cancel it and use that knowledge for my next game. If I release the game in a bad state, then I fully expect players to give me shit for it. I made the game, I released the game, and I have to suffer the consequences of my actions. Unless you're saying that it's not my fault that my game didn't run so well on each machine?
ShadowSoldier89
Member
these things are completely impossible to know, and I only have a cursory understanding of EA sports releases, but what engine are the PS360 versions of the sports franchises running on? I cant seem to find anything other than xbox one and PS4 versions have been running on IGNITE until now, with FIFA 18 making the switch to Frostbite. However I can't seem to find an engine for PS360 versions of the games. So is it an inhouse engine? If it was why was this older in house engine the choice to port over to switch instead of frostbite. Both wouldve required work to port.
I find it odd to immediately assume that they chose to work on another engine as opposed to frostbite when work was required either way. I find it more likely that getting games running well enough on Frostbite just isnt possible compared to the older systems engine. 720p on frostbite at 160 GFlops seems rough, considering battlefield 1 fluctuates between 720p and 900p on an xbox one
you are right, but was it the difference between not releasing the game at all, or releasing an older port. I find it odd that the immediate accusation is that EA was too lazy to port frostbite, EA is fucking in love with frostbite and are putting it everywhere
OnionPowder
Member
We don't know yet. The Nintendo listing does not say anything about the DLC or anything regarding it being the remastered version.
Soldiussnaku
Member
Nope, dragon age inquisition and NFS rivals also ran on last gen on FB3, digital foundry has a last gen face off for dragon age and comments on rivals in an PS4/xb1 face off. personally I have played both recently on PS3 and NFS rivals is a pretty damn good port down of ps4 version. Even if there are clear upgrades in the PS4 version. However performance wise it's pretty okay, runs at a not to shabby 1280x704 res. Gameplay is pretty identical to boot. Dragon age looks worse, but retains a very large similarity with the next gen versions gameplay wise.
There is no hardware hurdle for FB to run in modern tech like the switch. EA simply believes the money isn't there to invest porting FB to switch. After the reveal and backlash, I agree with them.
I am pretty sure is the remastered version it's just so downgraded that it's confusing people lol.
OnionPowder
Member
You would think that, but you would also think they would advertise it as the Special Edition as they do on all the other platforms.
It could just be Nintendo completely fucking their messaging like everything else.
sixteen-bit
Member
This doesn't surprise me.
It's definitely the Special Edition. Just take a look at the video and compare that to the PS4 version and the PS3 versions. Not sure why they didn't add the subtitle, though.
MonkeyMan29
Member
digoutyoursoul
Member
Agreed but this is going to be a running theme once Switch launches I feel. With some people the one thing they never do is look at Nintendo, it's a pattern of "devs are lazy" or "they hate Nintendo" which is tedious to say the least to read and listen to.
I love Nintendo but as a fan the worst thing you can do is think they are faultless, same with any product or company.
Poetic.Injustice
Member
Is there a comparison video anywhere?
dano1
A Sheep
You must work for Nintendo
No, in fact I've openly said that I will no longer support them going forward. However, it's still more likely that EA just didn't feel that it was worth porting Frostbite to Switch when they have no plans for consistent support. It just doesn't make sense for them to do so. Well, unless you feel that Frostbite is extremely poorly optimized compared to UE4.
No fuck that, you gonna get a sequel to Cookies & Cream.
---------
Honestly that Dark Souls rumor was bullshit at most.
what about EA's ignite engine? It can't even look as good as an xbone launch sports game? Why ps3/360? That's so archaic.
This system is archaic.
I don't understand what people wants, blame Nintendo for having another gen with poor third party support instead of the whole world.
Being able to run unreal 4 full version doesnt mean unreal 4 games coming to this. Your 10yr old laptop could run unreal 4 full version , doesnt mean a shit.
Its not gonna get graphically intense UE4 games (such as KH3,TEK7,SFV,Shenm3,Dead Island 2)
EDarkness said:
If the hardware wasn't really an issue then EA would have no good business reason to (reportedly) provide the Switch with the last-gen version.
The truth is the Switch is significantly underpowered in comparison to the current-gen consoles. The effect of this is starting to show in the software support the platform is receiving from third-party developers. We could all be entirely wrong and EA could be porting the current-gen version, but where we're not wrong is in saying that based on every leak and available pieces of information, the Switch is not a technical powerhouse. I think it's important to realize this sooner rather than later, because I predict that much like the Wii U and Wii, there will be a lot of developers who do not bother with the Switch due to the power limitations of the device. Understanding this will help you set realistic expectations of developer and publisher support.