Battlefield 4 had last gen versions and would easily run on Switch.
-
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
PdotMichael
Banned
The Switch is like around 300GF in docked mode. Even with the power of Nvidia flops that isnt exactly "closer to" PS4 and One.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
DICE made a video about frostbite running on iPhone a couple of years back. But, my guess is that the newer version does not support mobile hardware.
Weltall Zero
Member
I think you need to show your math. If the pro is just a ps4 on steroids with the heck is a switch? A Wii U on HGH?
shark sandwich
tenuously links anime, pedophile and incels
Haha no fucking way. It's a repeat of Madden 2013 for Wii U (it was basically 2012 w/roster update, whereas PS3/360 got a new game engine for 2013 IIRC).
It'll be Skyrim ported to the Oblivion engine.
Because nVidia ported it themselves using a strategy similar to WINE and wrappers aimed directly for running on Tegra instead of full source code port. Even if you force it to run on other Android devices it'll be missing model draws, textures, etc. (As far as I've seen anyway)
I might take the game with me since it would allow for local play with the joy cons and maybe the HD rumble will make the game feel better...
... but I fully expect the game itself to be a "Legacy Edition" like on the WiiU. Everything above that would be a plus and I don't expect much from EA unless the Switch is doing the Wii.
... but I fully expect the game itself to be a "Legacy Edition" like on the WiiU. Everything above that would be a plus and I don't expect much from EA unless the Switch is doing the Wii.
Audioboxer
Member
I've clearly completely overstepped the mark with my comments earlier then. Sheesh Nintendo.
Fourth Storm
Member
Such token support. I'm not going to bother assigning blame here. All I will say is that it does not bode well for the console. They need sports games.
It's not possible to make anything faster in that form factor without making a completely custom SoC, and that would have increased the already high price significantly. (Though I'm sure that most of GAF believes that Nintendo is making $100-150 per unit anyway.)
Yeah, it's not about blame. As i said it's more likely that EA didn't feel that it's worth the effort to port Frostbite than it is that Switch can't run Frostbite, but we can't exactly blame EA for taking the safe, cheap, and easy route with an unproven console.
The PS4 Pro has a ~2.25x increase in GPU power that is 90% of the time used to target a higher resolution for better image quality on 4K displays (which then gets downsampled if you own a 1080p TV), achieved with higher than 1080p resolutions (like 1440p, 1620p or 1800p) that gets upscaled to 4K with checkerboard rendering. CPU is the same but clocked higher (30% more performances), and memory bandwidth is slightly better too (~24%).
Meanwhile, compared to the Wii U, Switch features much newer and more efficient API (Vulkan vs DX10.1 equivalent), a modern Maxwell 2 GPU (vs 2008 VLIW5 featured in the Wii U), a vastly more powerful and modern CPU (ARM A57 or newer vs PPC 750 derivate that didn't even have SIMD units), at least 3x more RAM for games and 2-4x higher memory bandwidth for the main pool (64 or 128bit bus). Even when used as a standalone tablet Switch should be more powerful than the Wii U, and the GPU when docked is 2.5x faster compared to when it's undocked (768mhz vs 307).
This is without touching FP16, which should be largely used on the console considering its architecture. PS4 Pro should be able to take advantage of that as well, but i don't know by how much so i left it out of the argument. Anyway i showed my math, now it's your turn.
Audioboxer
Member
That may well be the case, but Nintendo are the ones obsessing over this hybrid concept. If you ask me they should have ditched the Wii U experiment like a bag of bricks, and made a standard home console supported by the N3DS currently with the aim to release a New N3DS in the fall. Kind of like how Sony do the PS4 and Vita, except Nintendo to their credit actually know how to do and support a portable handheld gaming device.
There's only so much sympathy you can give to the company everyone says "doesn't have the money or resources Sony/MS do". If so why the fuck are they constantly trying over engineered expensive and elaborate concepts? Either find a way to put up the money and resources needed, or scale back and be a bit more reasonable. It's as if Ken Kutaragi is now secretly working at Nintendo.
HD rumble and cow milking games are as ridiculous as these new '4K speakers' at CES. There comes a point where trying to flog gimmicky shite via PR jargon falls flat. Even MS got that handed to them with all the Kinect bullshit. Nintendo seem to be the kings of doubling down, MS at least to their credit eventually do 180s. The Wii was the perfect storm, Nintendo gotta stop the South Park member berries with the Wii and get with the times.
MisterXDTV
Member
Resolution alone does not define graphics or power.... It's 1080p 60 closer to Xbox One quality level or X360 quality level?
That's the point....
400 GF but your point still stands....
Xbox One S is 1400 GF
atomiksuperinsan
Neo Member
With Nvidia making a new custom NVN API that Nintendo plan to use across all ststems. You wouldnt be porting Frostbyte to an underpowered piece of tech that may not sell. You are porting it once for the opportunity to use it for a long time across multiple devices.
EA have to make a version of FIFA for the switch. Its in their liscencing agreement. So the question becomes.
What is the difference in cost between making a Frostbyte version of FIFA Switch vs a last gen port?
Its likely expensive. But still only a small percentage of FIFAs global marketing/development budget, and its certainly not enough to make FIFA unprofitable when every system is included. It could easily be written off as a marketing cost. (Something that would make EA look good publicly)
Its not a power issue. Frostbyte runs on Mobile Devices.
Aditionally if the Switch/Nintendo does become successfull in the future. Without Frostbyte being ported EA is not going to be able to pump out low effort ports which is going to cost them money overall. Since they would still have to port Frostbyte at a later date.
The only reason EA isnt porting Frostbyte for FIFA is because there is still bad blood from the WiiU era
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Alright, lack of Frostbite clearly means EA is not gonna support Switch.
Shadynasty
Member
Switch.....to last gen.
Yep, there is. The Shield has HL2 and Portal.
forknknife
Banned
Probably nothing more than PR BS but who knows. Peter Moore emphasizing that the switch version of FIFA will be custom built in response to somebody asking if it'll be based on the PS3/360 versions...
Peter Moore on Twitter: "Let me help you here, @tomphillipsEG the FIFA experience CUSTOM BUILT for Nintendo Switch
https://mobile.twitter.com/petermooreEA/status/820042981793071107
Peter Moore on Twitter: "Let me help you here, @tomphillipsEG the FIFA experience CUSTOM BUILT for Nintendo Switch
https://mobile.twitter.com/petermooreEA/status/820042981793071107
Yes we can and we should. By not porting Frostbite to Switch for FIFA (a port they are contractually obliged to make) EA is actively going against their own best interests to spite Nintendo.
The Port is a sunk cost anyway and porting the Frostbite version would cost a fraction of FIFA 2017s overall marketing budget. EA is being petty with no justifiable buisness position to not port the Frostbite version.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
First off, everyone needs to stop misspelling Frostbite.
Second, the last time I remember seeing Frostbite run on a mobile device was a tech demo. Nothing else is actually running it.
Skittzo0413
Member
Wasn't this clarified like a week ago? Why is this thread still even open?
orthodoxy1095
Banned
It was clarified soon after Tom first said it, and as many of us pointed out "custom-built" does not negate what Tom said.
Jaded Alyx
Member
Oh, you know.
And what will happen is people stumbling in and only reading the title/OP and not the most recent development.
I wondered why long after Peter Moore's tweet I was still seeing people posting with ABSOLUTE 100% CONFIDENCE that FIFA Switch is based on the PS3/360 version, FACT.
The OP should be updated at the very least.
The power of fake news again. HAHA
-
Who knows what custom built means in this context. I am hoping at least Ignite ports.
I'm sure this has already been posted here before, but it bears repeating if no one bothered to check for themselves.
https://twitter.com/petermooreEA/status/820042981793071107?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
Considering he said it in all caps in response to someone saying it was based on PS3/360, I'd say it's pretty clear what he meant.
Also, how does it make any fucking sense whatsoever? Both of those consoles were PPC based, and used completely different GPU architectures, even a port *down* would be easier coming from PS4/XB1. The switch is ARM based.
https://twitter.com/petermooreEA/status/820042981793071107?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
Considering he said it in all caps in response to someone saying it was based on PS3/360, I'd say it's pretty clear what he meant.
Also, how does it make any fucking sense whatsoever? Both of those consoles were PPC based, and used completely different GPU architectures, even a port *down* would be easier coming from PS4/XB1. The switch is ARM based.
EdwardTeach
Member
We would be better off with sensible soccer.
how doesnt it when the answer he gave was directly in response to "i heard its based off the 360/ps3 version". and he basically said the guy doesn't know what he was talking about as its custom.
forknknife
Banned
Lol I just bumped this thread with the same tweet
RichiRamjag
Member
That's a good point
ShadowFox08
Member
400-500gflops actually. Also the nvidia architecture is more modern than xbone and ps4. Performance per flop it will do 30-40% better. The Switch could be anywhere between 40-50% as powerful as xbone for gpu.
Skittzo0413
Member
As others have said, the fact that he tweeted in response to Tom Phillips' original tweet and spelled out custom built in all caps makes it pretty obvious that he's debunking what Tom said.
Eurogamer said around 300Gflops docked.
Mithos
Member
They altered something? The numbers they gave out we got 156 Gflops undocked, 393 Gflops docked. (assuming 256 CUDA cores ofc)
So you rounded up?
As far as I know they have been debunked
MadJackChurchill
Banned
AMD Flops and Nvidia Flops are not equal.
ThisGuy
Member
Lol, at 393, who rounds down to 300?
How so?
You're not wrong, at least going off of their respective graphics cards.
I was thinking within the 300 ballpark. But as mentioned before, Nvidia flops do more than AMD's.
Mithos
Member
2 x cores x mhz /1000...
2 x 256 x 768mhz / 1000 = 393 Gflops
2 x 256 x 307.2mhz / 1000 = 157 Glops
Right?
That about sums it up, I can see how you rounded to 400. 393 is close enough to 400.
FingerBang
Member
True, when it comes to performance Nvidia gets more out of their flops.
But wasn't that mostly because of AMD's weak performance with DirectX 11?
iirc eurogamer directly contradicts the leaked specs of the foxconn sources which stated that the switch will be more powerful than what eurogamer estimated. Apparently eurogamer's sources had older dev-kits at their hands.
Check this thread for the ongoing discussion:
http://neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1334549&page=1
Crazyorloco
Member
I feel like FIFA 2017 for the Xbox 360 looks pretty good actually: https://youtu.be/HksiCQotskE
Now if they're using the older FIFA's then we're in trouble.
Now if they're using the older FIFA's then we're in trouble.
That's more true in a PC environment with AMD lackluster DX11 performance.
Jaded Alyx
Member
I rest my case.