FFXIV FOR THE NINTENDO SWITCH

[Ametrine]

FF explorers was pretty fun, the only problem was that the online game play was a nightmare. The framerate was so bad even on the 3DS XL.

The NEW3DS was better, but it chugged along pretty miserably.

I actually bought Explorers expecting it to be like a mini FFXI/XIV, but got FF:Monster Hunter edition, instead. I didn't like it all that much since I dislike MH, even if I could rock Geomancer.

[OMGAFLYINGPENGUIN]

The NEW3DS was better, but it chugged along pretty miserably.

I actually bought Explorers expecting it to be like a mini FFXI/XIV, but got FF:Monster Hunter edition, instead. I didn't like it all that much since I dislike MH, even if I could rock Geomancer.

Haha unfortunately no, explorers was in a way made from the old crystal chronicles series :P, so it kind of has that monster hunter/fantasy life kind of feel, but it is quite you should embrace it!

[Ametrine]

Given the size of the device, I can't see it being on par with the Xbox One.

The only issue with that is how bleeding edge the hardware is going to be in this thing verses the now years old Xbone. The newer Xbox One that is power boosted (Scorpio, I think?) is actually smaller, so /shrug.

[Chewy2nd]

The only issue with that is how bleeding edge the hardware is going to be in this thing verses the now years old Xbone. The newer Xbox One that is power boosted (Scorpio, I think?) is actually smaller, so /shrug.

I don't think the Xbox One tech is small enough already to be put into a paper thin tablet. I could be wrong, but I don't think it will be as powerful as the base Xbox One, which means its going to become a case of "Switch limitations" rather than "PS3 limitations". The line up doesn't inspire too much confidence when the most graphically complex game was an updated version of a 2011 game.

[Ametrine]

I don't think the Xbox One tech is small enough already to be put into a paper thin tablet. I could be wrong, but I don't think it will be as powerful as the base Xbox One, which means its going to become a case of "Switch limitations" rather than "PS3 limitations". The line up doesn't inspire too much confidence when the most graphically complex game was an updated version of a 2011 game.

You mean Skyrim?

What about Mario Kart 8, Breath of the Wild, or Splatoon? I'm worried you're equating busier textures with better graphics, which just isn't Nintendo's style. They put more stock into physics, lighting, draw distance, and consistent frame rates.

So, we can be sure that the Switch is at least as powerful as the Wii U.

The Skyrim reveal was more of an encouragement of their being 3rd party support, the bane of the Wii U, verses graphical prowess.

[FearTheOldBlood]

Never gonna happen

[Avenger]

I wasn't able to find a post with the devs weighing in on this, but I believe Yoshi-p got this question in the FanFest "Please Look Forward To It" Q&A session and he replied that they wanted to enable as many players as possible to play FFXIV, and that this could include Xbox One and potentially NX (now Nintendo Switch) as well (minimum hardware requirements permitting, presumably - which doesn't look great if it's a Tegra/tablet-type system, and we don't know the DRAM size which may be another critical issue.)

Based on this answer, and given that Dragon Quest X is going to be on the Switch, and that FFXIV can run on the PS Vita via PS4 Remote Play, I would speculate that Switch might not be completely outside the range of possibilities, but Xbox One might be more likely (it's also already in the PS4 performance ballpark and is getting a hardware upgrade.)

However, at they same time they also announced that 4.0 will not only discontinue PS3 support but will also raise the minimum system requirements for PC (and Mac, presumably), so we were advised to please upgrade our hardware over the next few (8?) months (notably to 64-bit processors) so we'll be ready to run Stormblood as soon as it drops. I think he also said that Core 2 Duo and 32-bit intel CPUs haven't really been sold for years, so any modern CPU should be 64-bit and much more powerful than machines from ~2009 or earlier (though I note I've seen some pretty underpowered laptops/netbooks/surface tablets... those might not be so good for Stormblood presumably.)

[Anera]

Given that Dragon Quest X is going to be on the Switch... and that FFXIV can run on the PS Vita via PS4 Remote Play, it doesn't seem outside the range of possibilities.

It not runing on PS Vita, it transmit video to PS Vita or smartphones
so basically you need a good connection internet or 4g to Remote Play

[Kosmos992k]

FFXIV can run on the PS Vita via PS4 Remote Play, I would speculate that Switch might not be completely outside the range of possibilities, but Xbox One might be more likely (it's also already in the PS4 performance ballpark and is getting a hardware upgrade.)

Vita runs no game code when using Remote Play, it's just a controller and remote screen, FFXIV doesn't run on the hand held at all.

The new Xbox One, the one meant to be more powerful, will not ship for another 12-13 months.

[Avenger]

Vita runs no game code when using Remote Play, it's just a controller and remote screen, FFXIV doesn't run on the hand held at all.

The new Xbox One, the one meant to be more powerful, will not ship for another 12-13 months.

@kosmos (I've read a bunch of your posts btw) Indeed, it's called "Remote Play" because the game is running on the remote PS4 (I assume it's similar to PlayStation Now.) (Though it might be possible in each case that some rendering is done locally - perhaps someone has some more details on the Remote Play/PS Now protocols?) But I think it's notable that it works in a handheld form factor, and if the Switch offers good enough performance, then why not?

I expect that the existing Xbox One is probably good enough to run FFXIV - iirc the reason FFXIV wasn't on it was some non-performance issue between Microsoft and SE, like wanting separate MS-only servers or something, and FFXV will actually be arriving on Xbox One.