Yoshi-P says discussions about FFXIV on Switch and Xbox One are "Positive"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SerLuke

It's none of your business what platform people game on, quit being an elitist. Stuff like this bugs the crap out of me, I have a PS4 and a Switch I don't go around acting like I'm some sort of member of a superior group they just have the games I enjoy and that's the end of it, if someone is having fun with their console who the heck cares if they are on PC or not?

---

K, lets bring back ps3 support then.

Consoles are just cut down PCs marketed towards gamers. The lowest spec platform they bring in will be the new ball and chain dragging behind. I get they won't ever drop playstaition support for ffxiv but bringing in more platforms whose specs are not superior to the ps4 is a mistake. Is the switch and xbox one superior to the ps4? Are they at least on par even?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

K, lets bring back ps3 support then.

Consoles are just cut down PCs marketed towards gamers. The lowest spec platform they bring in will be the new ball and chain dragging behind. I get they won't ever drop playstaition support for ffxiv but bringing in more platforms whose specs are not superior to the ps4 is a mistake. Is the switch and xbox one superior to the ps4? Are they at least on par even?

---

Xbox One X
CPU Eight custom x86 cores clocked at 2.3GHz
GPU Integrated AMD graphics with 6 teraflops of performance
RAM 12GB GDDRS
Storage 1TB
Optical Drive 4K/HDR Blu-ray drive
4K Support
HDR Support

I don't know much about technical specs or what people run for this game but it's been introduced at the most powerful console to date, beating out the PS Pro

MS still want their own servers...
This discussion has not changed the many times SE has talked with them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

K, lets bring back ps3 support then.

Consoles are just cut down PCs marketed towards gamers. The lowest spec platform they bring in will be the new ball and chain dragging behind. I get they won't ever drop playstaition support for ffxiv but bringing in more platforms whose specs are not superior to the ps4 is a mistake. Is the switch and xbox one superior to the ps4? Are they at least on par even?

---

The PS3 is a dead platform that's not even being produced anymore, and there's PCs out there that run this game worse than the Switch would. Just being on a PC doesn't mean you instantly get a better experience than a console.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maero

MS still want their own servers...
This discussion has not changed the many times SE has talked with them

---

Perhaps it has it could be what Yoshi P meant by "positive"

If they switched to using a more modern engine I don't think the switch would perform badly (it runs 720p right?) but considering how SE is an "integrated" company like Sony I doubt it would happen. That would be the best bet I would think for that possibility though. I've been playing a bunch of other titles lately with more detailed graphics and they perform better than FF14 does. Honestly I think that would be a very low priority for them, I would imagine they would rather make a new MMO for these platforms than port an old one. Since Xbox runs windows at the most basic level it would be by far the easiest port to any other platform so from what I can tell that would just be down to them being able to come together on a deal between the companies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shouko

Xbox One X
CPU Eight custom x86 cores clocked at 2.3GHz
GPU Integrated AMD graphics with 6 teraflops of performance
RAM 12GB GDDRS
Storage 1TB
Optical Drive 4K/HDR Blu-ray drive
4K Support
HDR Support

I don't know much about technical specs or what people run for this game but it's been introduced at the most powerful console to date, beating out the PS Pro

---

Marketing and reality are often two different things. The reviews I'm reading are saying despite the specs being higher performance wise it's on par with the ps4 pro sans VR support. And should the game get xbox support will it only be the xbox one x or will it be the standard xbox one that gets supported?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SerLuke

The PS3 is a dead platform that's not even being produced anymore, and there's PCs out there that run this game worse than the Switch would. Just being on a PC doesn't mean you instantly get a better experience than a console.

---

Sure I could dust off my old workhorse PC from the turn of the century and barely run the game if at all. Whats that got to do with anything really though? Unlike a console like the "dead" ps3 this game was originally designed to work on, a PC can be upgraded from barely running to outperforming any console. Whereas with a console you have to replace the whole unit and wait for the manufacturer to design and produce the upgrade.

By saddling up to multiple console platforms SE is chaining its ability to upgrade the game itself to the development cycle of all the console manufacturers involved and to the capabilities of the lowest spec console made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

By saddling up to multiple console platforms SE is chaining its ability to upgrade the game itself to the development cycle of all the console manufacturers involved and to the capabilities of the lowest spec console made.

---

Not really, there's not much you can do to upgrade low spec laptops that barely run the game right now, again like I said just because someone is on a PC doesn't mean they will magically get better performance. Its not just consoles holding the PC back they are never going to tune the game exclusively for high end PCs even if the PS4 wasn't a part of the equation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by enthauptet

If they switched to using a more modern engine I don't think the switch would perform badly (it runs 720p right?) but considering how SE is an "integrated" company like Sony I doubt it would happen. That would be the best bet I would think for that possibility though. I've been playing a bunch of other titles lately with more detailed graphics and they perform better than FF14 does. Honestly I think that would be a very low priority for them, I would imagine they would rather make a new MMO for these platforms than port an old one. Since Xbox runs windows at the most basic level it would be by far the easiest port to any other platform so from what I can tell that would just be down to them being able to come together on a deal between the companies.

---

Yeah I imagine it would run at 720p with 30fps lock on Switch just fine, while still having better load times and slightly better graphics than PS3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SerLuke

Not really, there's not much you can do to upgrade low spec laptops that barely run the game right now, again like I said just because someone is on a PC doesn't mean they will magically get better performance. Its not just consoles holding the PC back they are never going to tune the game exclusively for high end PCs even if the PS4 wasn't a part of the equation.



Yeah I imagine it would run at 720p with 30fps lock on Switch just fine, while still having better load times and slightly better graphics than PS3

---

*smh*
Laptops like consoles are cutdown PCs and is why I told people earlier to go desktop and not laptop. Desktops are also a fair bit cheaper than the equivalent laptop.

And PC only games also never fine tune their games only for the bleeding edge, they do make it an option though. And it is the consoles holding them back. PCs can be upgraded at will, consoles only when the manufacturer builds it.

Switch play at 30fps and 720p? That's pure awesomesauce, 20+ years ago -_- *sigh*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

*smh*
Laptops like consoles are cutdown PCs and is why I told people earlier to go desktop and not laptop. Desktops are also a fair bit cheaper than the equivalent laptop.

And PC only games also never fine tune their games only for the bleeding edge, they do make it an option though. And it is the consoles holding them back. PCs can be upgraded at will, consoles only when the manufacturer builds it.

Switch play at 30fps and 720p? That's pure awesomesauce, 20+ years ago -_- *sigh*

---

Again what you tell people to buy and what reality is are two different things, people have laptops many of which are much weaker than PS4s to play this game on and that's not going to magically change because you tell people to get a desktop and the dev team still has to keep those into account. Hardware elitism is silly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SerLuke

Again what you tell people to buy and what reality is are two different things, people have laptops many of which are much weaker than PS4s to play this game on and that's not going to magically change because you tell people to get a desktop and the dev team still has to keep those into account. Hardware elitism is silly.

---

Lol It isn't "hardware elitism" its cold hard reality. Or are you going to tell me PS3 limitations was never a thing? As far as people with laptops weaker than the PS4, yes the devs can leave them behind and will. More powerful laptops and desktop options are available to them and for prices no worse than what they forced ps3 holdouts to shell out. Even PC only mmos force their users to upgrade from time to time when they want to push the games capabilities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

Marketing and reality are often two different things. The reviews I'm reading are saying despite the specs being higher performance wise it's on par with the ps4 pro sans VR support. And should the game get xbox support will it only be the xbox one x or will it be the standard xbox one that gets supported?

---

You asked if they were on par, I linked the specs, I clearly stated I don't know what people are currently running. The hardware inside of the One X is far superior to that of the PS Pro, whether it's on par as far as running games? Idk nor do I care. I own neither of the upgraded systems and have no desire to really buy one or the other. I don't even like this gen of consoles tbh, I own a ps4 strictly because a friend gave me his old one and upgraded to a pro, only reason I even play ffxiv.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maero

MS still want their own servers...
This discussion has not changed the many times SE has talked with them

---

Can't they give them own servers in existing data centre? They would have own world, but could still play with others.

Hurray, 2 more systems to hold back development of the game. I for one welcome our new Switch-BoxOne limitations memes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaonis

Hurray, 2 more systems to hold back development of the game. I for one welcome our new Switch-BoxOne limitations memes.

---

Came here to say this.

I'd love to play FF on my smart fridge or my car stereo. Who cares if it limits development for everyone else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyvid

I think you are confusing Sony with Microsoft. Sony already allows it, Microsoft wants it closed off from PC and PS4.

---

Recently its been all Sony, like with Rocket League and Minecraft both which they refuse to allow cross plat play.

I personally get why theyd want to port to switch, but uh, i feel like we'd get more "limitations" if it was added to the party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaonis

Hurray, 2 more systems to hold back development of the game. I for one welcome our new Switch-BoxOne limitations memes.

---

Meh I'm fine with the game as it is techwise esp if it means more friends to play with that just have those systems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cakekizyy

Can't they give them own servers in existing data centre? They would have own world, but could still play with others.

---

Well by MS wanting their own servers it sounded like they did not want to play with the PS4 crowd, could be wrong.
There is also the XBox Live requirement i believe. Basically they are not wanting to budge on this in all the meetings Yoshi has met with them
While i am not a fan of xbox at all i still would not make a big deal of it if xbox players eventually are able to play, everyone should be able to enjoy this game :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

Lol It isn't "hardware elitism" its cold hard reality. Or are you going to tell me PS3 limitations was never a thing?

---

The PS3 client was memory limited from day one, remember how segments of the UI needed to be cut out to get the minimal TP bars in? PS3 memory limitation right there. Don't believe me? Note how we got all these new UI elements right as the PS3 support got cut. The CPU and GPU weren't an issue, it was entirely down to that trifling 256+256mb rambus ram configuration not playing nice in a game where you can't tightly control and predict assets.

Standing in Kugane by the market board at max settings sees my PC using just over 1GB of ram, lets be super crazy generous and set aside another 1GB for the GPU for this and we've still got at least another 1GB sat free on our imaginary Switch client.

TLDR: The switch won't be anything like the boat anchor the PS3 client was and personally I'd love to see FFXIV get ported over to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

The PS3 client was memory limited from day one, remember how segments of the UI needed to be cut out to get the minimal TP bars in? PS3 memory limitation right there. Don't believe me? Note how we got all these new UI elements right as the PS3 support got cut. The CPU and GPU weren't an issue, it was entirely down to that trifling 256+256mb rambus ram configuration not playing nice in a game where you can't tightly control and predict assets.

Standing in Kugane by the market board at max settings sees my PC using just over 1GB of ram, lets be super crazy generous and set aside another 1GB for the GPU for this and we've still got at least another 1GB sat free on our imaginary Switch client.

TLDR: The switch won't be anything like the boat anchor the PS3 client was and personally I'd love to see FFXIV get ported over to it.

---

So it'll still be an anchor just not as bad? Heh, very reassuring.

Now how about instead of standing at the marketboard with nothing more exciting going on than gil spamming, head into some mass combat on max settings. Your resource usage will balloon and your frame rates will probably drop too.

Also the size of the RAM (only 3 gigs total really? Awesome if you're living in 1999) is but one factor for performance. The amount of ram and how it is accessed and allocated as well as its speed is important to. Is it shared memory? It sounds like it is from what you describe. When a system has to share memory between its video card and main cpu *shudder* it's not a good thing for gaming. Perfectly acceptable for basic business applications though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

Now how about instead of standing at the marketboard with nothing more exciting going on than gil spamming, head into some mass combat on max settings. Your resource usage will balloon and your frame rates will probably drop too.

---

About the only unavoidable increase there will be CPU usage due to animation overheads. Even in Rabanastre, memory usage is in the same ballpark if not lower (I used Kugane's market board to force as many assets into memory as I could FYI, it's a complex zone with a large amount of characters around). In a theoretical Switch port both the memory and GPU usage would be scaled back very significantly through lower resolution textures and more aggressive LOD settings. In short, unless SE handle the Switch port like they did the Apple Mac port and just chuck it in a wrapper (Which is unlikely since it uses gameworks, porting to should be somewhat painless), it's not going to be a problem unless they suddenly and substantially up their production values (which isn't going to happen at this stage).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

Also the size of the RAM (only 3 gigs total really? Awesome if you're living in 1999) is but one factor for performance. The amount of ram and how it is accessed and allocated as well as its speed is important to. Is it shared memory? It sounds like it is from what you describe. When a system has to share memory between its video card and main cpu *shudder* it's not a good thing for gaming. Perfectly acceptable for basic business applications though.

---

Ehm, I think every modern current generation console (The 3DS is the only exception that comes to my mind?) uses a unified memory architecture no? The original Xbox One has it's little ES ram segment but that's about the only variance going on here. It's also interesting to note that the PS3's memory architecture actually had comparable if not more bandwidth than the current consoles ;) Being Rambus, I'd feel safe assuming it had awful latency though.

Don't get me wrong, I love a nice beefy PC setup as much as the next man (Currently sat infront of a 1080TI/X34A pairing) and no, I don't have a PS4/Xbox one because I'm rubbish with gamepads. Even with a PC of my setup, I'd still gladly put my money on a switch port for the convenience of it. I'd never touch Savage on it, but it'd be beautifully convenient for dailies and casual gameplay.

And yes, I do have actual experience in this field, whilst I narrowly miss the 1999 reference, I spent much of 2000-2001 porting Quake 3 to the PS2. We took that game from a 64mb footprint down to 16mb primarily through a huge amount of level optimisation and typically half sized textures and it's worth noting we actually had it running at 60 fps for much of it's development. It's a surprisingly interesting topic =(

MMOs are games that are supposed to live, grow, and develop over many years. Any tie to a specific console is going to limit it going forward and that's simply a fact - unless SE is willing to be continuously dropping consoles. Considering how long it took them to drop PS3 support, I doubt they'd do that on a more aggressive timescale.

I mean it would be awesome to play it on switch since you can play it anywhere, but I don't want limitations so just keep it on PC please :<

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lilseph

However, they still depend on Sony to allow the use of a cross-platform feature involving them. Come on, Sony -.- ...

---

This is the fault of Xbox though. You have to look at it form the perspective that back when FFXIV was a risky venture Xbox wanted nothing to do with it unless they got their own Servers, but SE didn't want to do that. Now Sony is in a position of power because Switch/Xbox want to gain those numbers that playstation has for trusting SE with 2.0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

Snip

---

Honestly you're not inspiring confidence in the Switch for me here.

I suggested mass combat to stress the system. Once you load the background into memory it shouldn't be too hard on the system. Load up a frontline with 72 players casting spells trying to kill each other in a tight space. Loading and rendering all those spell effects rather randomly being called for and players coming and going should put it through its paces.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

it's not going to be a
problem unless they suddenly and substantially up their production values (which isn't going to happen at this stage)

---

And they have the opportunity now to up the production values to what the PS4 can handle now that the PS3 is out of the picture but:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

In a theoretical Switch port
both the memory and GPU usage would be scaled back very significantly through lower resolution textures and more aggressive LOD settings.

---

I guess we're downgrading that potential for the switch?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

I'd still gladly put my money on a switch port for the convenience of it. I'd never touch Savage on it, but it'd be beautifully
convenient for dailies and casual gameplay.

---

I'll bite why won't you touch savage on it? Don't think it can handle it well enough for that kind of gameplay? Please tell me it's your aversion to gamepads and not that. If it's because you don't think it can handle it, that's reason enough not to port it.

As far as the convenience of portability the switch can bring, correct me if I'm wrong as I don't have a PS3 or 4 or a recent PSP but I do recall Sony marketing being able to play your playstation 3? or 4 games on your PSP via streaming? Does that not already satisfy what you want the switch for?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

[...] I do recall Sony marketing being able to play your playstation 3? or 4 games on your PSP via streaming? Does that not already satisfy what you want the switch for?

---

That would be the PS Vita, and as someone who has used it at many a ffxiv lan party before getting a laptop, I would wager that if we were talking strictly streaming (not sure what from in the case of the Switch), the Switch would likely handle that much better than the Vita due to hardware. Larger controls and screen make it far more practical as well.

They had to reduce the experts per patch cycle from 4 to 3, and this last patch gave us all of two things; rival wings and perform. Why on earth is porting it over to two different consoles, one that is portable (which means you need to optimize it for both on the road use and docked) even obtainable? That means they need to balance patches for 2 more platforms and do a tremendous amount of work. We'd get no content again ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

I'll bite why won't you touch savage on it? Don't think it can handle it well enough for that kind of gameplay? Please tell me it's your aversion to gamepads and not that. If it's because you don't think it can handle it, that's reason enough not to port it.

---

For me, it is the aversion to controllers. I won't even do combat based gameplay on it. Crafting is a bit of a tough one for me too, gathering and managing retainers is the only thing I can pull off to any degree beyond being the worst 0.000000000000001% of the playerbase using a controller (a gamepad to me is something akin to the Razer Orbweaver). That's how infused into keyboard and mouse I am. Here's the thing, if we drop the console support, this game is likely to die. I'd wager that the majority of the playerbase is PS4 (because I'd say the majority of PC MMORPG players are playing World of Warcraft, which is PC only but has a huge following). Xbox and Switch would allow SE to get better sub numbers. How much so, I don't know. Would it be worth it? Who knows. But, I don't think FFXIV can afford to drop all console support.

I find it pretty rude that Yoshi is sniffing around the Switch when SE cannot be bothered to localize the NINTENDO MMO they already have in Dragon Quest X. Kindly sort your selves out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seig345

That would be the PS Vita, and as someone who has used it at many a ffxiv lan party before getting a laptop, I would wager that if we were talking strictly streaming (not sure what from in the case of the Switch), the Switch would likely handle that much better than the Vita due to hardware. Larger controls and screen make it far more practical as well.

---

The Vita actually works shockingly well at letting you play the game. Trying to use that rear touch pad as buttons is just horrific though

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mixae

I mean it would be awesome to play it on switch since you can play it anywhere, but I don't want limitations so just keep it on PC please :<

---

Um what, play it everwhere? Have you forgotten that this game is an MMO and requires constant internet acces?

The pro controller would just be as the PS4 controller I assume so that would be playable?
But how would you play it with those joy con sticks? Let's forget the fact that you need to be 100% online for now... how would that actually be 'good' on such a small screen and those horrible joy-con sticks? With all those buttons you have on your hotbar?

How would one beat ultimate bahamuth on that tiny screen with Joy-con sticks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pomelo

I find it pretty rude that Yoshi is sniffing around the Switch when SE cannot be bothered to localize the NINTENDO MMO they already have in Dragon Quest X. Kindly sort your selves out.

---

Dragon Quest has always played second fiddle to Final Fantasy in the West. Also running MMOs are expensive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

I suggested mass combat to stress the system. Once you load the background into memory it shouldn't be too hard on the system. Load up a frontline with 72 players casting spells trying to kill each other in a tight space. Loading and rendering all those spell effects rather randomly being called for and players coming and going should put it through its paces.

---

It'll handle that the same way the PS3 did, via very aggressive LOD, animation scaling and additionally, resolution scaling as well. Compare the PS3 and Switch versions of LA Noire, it's really not an issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

I'll bite why won't you touch savage on it? Don't think it can handle it well enough for that kind of gameplay? Please tell me it's your aversion to gamepads and not that. If it's because you don't think it can handle it, that's reason enough not to port it.

---

Precisely that. I can't stress enough how rubbish I am with gamepads =(

In all honesty, I'm surprised people seem to think that the Switch is so utterly incapable of handling this game. On the GPU side, the Tegra X1 in the switch sits roughly between the GTX 750 and the GT 730 (Which has a better core count, but also a significantly slower memory setup than even the Switch). The 730 struggles with certain sequences (SB's Alex transition is an easy example) due to it's slow memory but the 750 handles things very respectably on medium/high settings. With the inevitable axing of texture quality to get the storage requirements under control, 30 fps at 720-900p is well within grasp with the current game IMHO.

Where's the problem with that? It's not PC master race quality for sure, but it's perfectly respectable for that ~6" screen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fhaerron

Um what, play it everwhere? Have you forgotten that this game is an MMO and requires constant internet access?

---

I had to spend a stint raiding in Midas via mobile tethering on a thin and light laptop no less. That's really no problem for anyone with 4G reception nowadays. (EDIT In Europe and Japan at least, NA Mobile operators are literally the devil, and all the internet in Aus appears to get eaten by Cockatoos and spiders)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pomelo

I find it pretty rude that Yoshi is sniffing around the Switch when SE cannot be bothered to localize the NINTENDO MMO they already have in Dragon Quest X. Kindly sort your selves out.

---

I enjoyed Dragon Quest VIII immensely. It's a real shame that the franchise has not been given much love outside of Japan - especially with how incredibly well done VIII's English localisation happened to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

I had to spend a stint raiding in Midas via mobile tethering on a thin and light laptop no less. That's really no problem for anyone with 4G reception nowadays. (EDIT In Europe and Japan at least, NA Mobile operators are literally the devil, and all the internet in Aus appears to get eaten by Cockatoos and spiders)

---

Yes but you are sitting somewhere stable for X amount of time.

playing on the go, while I'm 'going' to work or other stuff (I take both 2 busses and 2 trains from and to work) well I do have 4G on my phone but tbh it would be a real hassle to set it up as hotspot then connect switch to that then etc (oh and connection looses quite a lot while on the train too).

Playing offline games on the Switch is really no problem but online on the go will be only for a small minority available.

And still, how would you clear ultimate bahamut or O4S or w/e with such awfull controll sticks and weirdly placed buttons?

Sure you could put the screen on table and take the pro controller but this will again reduce the 'playing on the go' part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fhaerron

Playing offline games on the Switch is really no problem but online on the go will be only for a small minority available.

---

Splatoon 2 clearly demonstrates that it's not as big a problem as you seem to think, particularly so in the all important home market for SE and Nintendo where it's an absolute phenomenon.

I agree that the Joycons aren't great (the fact I have multiple Pro controllers kind of attests to that) but they aren't disastrous either unless you have shovels for hands? The buttons are fine IMHO, the D-Pad is the glaring problem in my eyes.

MS is the reason you are not getting a XIV port. They want the service go over their servers and possibly even require a gold membership.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cerbolt

Honestly if it goes on the switch I'd get it in a heart beat. How could I turn down ffxiv on the go?

---

I remote play on my Vita all the time, it really nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I enjoyed Dragon Quest VIII immensely. It's a real shame that the franchise has not been given much love outside of Japan - especially with how incredibly well done VIII's English localisation happened to be.

---

I hope you tried VIII on the 3DS as well!

Well, I saw the game play video of dragon quest heroes 2 on switch when it came out, frame rate was pretty bad there compared to ps4 version which doesn't seems to have the problem. And this is offline game, so I have a hunch that the frame rate will probably not that great on switch for ffxiv.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

In all honesty, I'm surprised people seem to think that the Switch is so utterly incapable of handling this game. On the GPU side, the Tegra X1 in the switch sits roughly between the GTX 750 and the GT 730 (Which has a better core count, but also a significantly slower memory setup than even the Switch). The 730 struggles with certain sequences (SB's Alex transition is an easy example) due to it's slow memory but the 750 handles things very respectably on medium/high settings. With the inevitable axing of texture quality to get the storage requirements under control, 30 fps at 720-900p is well within grasp with the current game IMHO.

---

This ^ the Switch version would be able to perform better than a PC using that card because they would actually be able to fine tune it for that specific hardware which they can't do on a PC.