FFXIV FOR THE NINTENDO SWITCH

[Seraphor]

Do you mean two on both sides or just two in general? Because it has the standard two on both sides that the PS4 also employs.

Ah ok, I didn't realise it had 2 on each side.
I guess it has the same buttons then, if you take the +/- buttins as L/R3.

[AleXwern]

Ah ok, I didn't realise it had 2 on each side.
I guess it has the same buttons then, if you take the +/- buttins as L/R3.

Switch has buttons like L/R3 in analog sticks though. It has exactly as many buttons as DS4.

[Gwenorai]

Only if it was some sort of spin-off where you can use it for gathering/crafting/fishing and certain games in the golden saucer where the rewards can be synced to the 'main game' then sureeeeeee. Otherwise, no.

[Bright-Flower]

While in concept I'm all for FF XIV on more platforms, I don't know that the switch will hold up. I mean let's say that the Switch can handle Stormblood just fine for arguements sake, will it be able to handle Shadowbringers? Or the expansion after that? Will the online be stable? Nintendo's online service isn't exactly top notch.

I love my switch but I just don't feel like FFXIV on it would end well.

With them porting all thse FF games over though I would love a Tactics and Type 0 port for the Switch.

[deadman1204]

they would have to dumb the game down soo badly to fit on switch it'd be pathetic.

Plus, how could you ever play on a mmo screen that small. It just wouldn't work.

[RitsukoSonoda]

they would have to dumb the game down soo badly to fit on switch it'd be pathetic.

Plus, how could you ever play on a mmo screen that small. It just wouldn't work.

PSO2 I believe was playable on PS Vita in Japan. Smaller screen and also an MMO.

[Corue]

PSO2 I believe was playable on PS Vita in Japan. Smaller screen and also an MMO.

PSO2 is more comparable to Monster Hunter than a tab-target MMO.
You have significantly less buttons to map.

[RitsukoSonoda]

PSO2 is more comparable to Monster Hunter than a tab-target MMO.
You have significantly less buttons to map.

We're now going to claim limitations on button mapping when button wise it's just short 2 shoulder buttons present on a PS controller as a way to discredit a game from the same genre? I'm not referencing the central touchpad on the PS4 because it wasn't present on the PS3. I did try out FFXI back on a PS2 on a triple boxing experiment with a controller which lasted all of about 5 minutes before I tossed the controller aside and connected a keyboard to the console. Button mapping is essentially a handicap encountered on most console/handheld games when compared to options on a PC. Even on something as simple as an FPS game.

[Fellgon]

they would have to dumb the game down soo badly to fit on switch it'd be pathetic.

Plus, how could you ever play on a mmo screen that small. It just wouldn't work.

Its never about size...its about fun. Size dont mather, im pretty sure that in japan are cellphones more powerful than a PC...

[Sigma-Astra]

Its never about size...its about fun. Size dont mather, im pretty sure that in japan are cellphones more powerful than a PC...

Not really, considering the kinds of cellphones we use in the states are about the same as the ones used in Japan and technically, a lot of our electronics and their parts are made overseas.

Cellphones could never be more powerful than a PC at the moment simply because the size of the phone limits to how strong of a processor, graphics, sound, etc can be put into the device without it overheating. A cellphone is made to be compact and mobile and the games made for cellphones are created with that in mind, plus the maximum specs allowed on each brand: Apple, Samsung, etc. Phones can't be upgraded in the same sense as PC's either, so, a PC will always be more powerful than a simple cellphone. By the time the next new phone is out, you can upgrade your PC with something that would be equally better than the specs from last year's phone model.

My Galaxy S9 has a Snapdragon 845 or Exynos 9810 processor.

Meanwhile, my Macbook Pro has a SSD and a 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7 as it's processor. I'm pretty sure the Mac eclipses the S9 by far in terms of power. The custom PC desktop sitting in the dining room beats both of them out of the water though.

Also noted, cellphones run on batteries so they have to use power as efficient as possible, meanwhile, a PC will always have a constant access to electricity from being plugged into a wall and therefore able to run more powerfully due to a constant supply of energy. Operating systems designed for computers and laptops are full-featured. They are designed to take advantage of fast CPUs, large amounts of disk space, and high amounts of RAM. Also, they take advantage of the features of modern chipsets that are not available on most mobile devices. PC's usually carry much more storage than cellphones as well, as far as exceeding even one TB now. Cellphones are kept between 8 GB and 64 GB with it built in.