Awful list, many of these games weren't Xbox exclusive and can still easily be found for a few bucks on PC. Why play Morrowind on Xbox BC when pretty much any PC sold these days can run it better, same with Max Payne and Battlefront II. Xbox BC should focus on games that haven't been released elsewhere, games like Panzer Dragoon Orta, Deathrow or even Brute Force.
Microsoft has allowed Rare to work on a Nintendo platform in the past (Diddy Kong Racing DS and I believe a few other handheld games). So while Goldeneye is unlikely to happen due to the rights to the Bond franchise, Perfect Dark, Diddy Kong Racing, DK64, JFG and Conker could possibly happen. I think Microsoft is open to doing business with Nintendo if it doesn't threaten their console and if there's money to be made.
With that being said, I feel like out of the few...
I do hope we get some of the big but less successful games on the Switch, as opposed to only getting the usual games. I do get that Pokken and MK8 made sense and that Smash Bros and Hyrule Warriors will likely get ported in the future, but I feel games like Tokyo Mirage Sessions, Bayonetta 2 and Xenoblade Chronicles X deserve to get a chance to be showed to a wider audience.
Well, he isn't completely wrong. The original Xbox was the most powerful of the three consoles. The Xbox 360, while proving to be less powerful in the long run than the PS3, was the most powerful console when it was launched (a year before its competition). Obviously this was not the case when the Xbox One launched, but with Xbox One X, they can once again claim to have the most powerful console hardware, until the next generation.
I do believe that porting Wii U games, as well as some remasters of Gamecube and Wii games, to the Switch would help the console. My guess is that many 3rd party publishers are still thinking about publishing on the Switch, but won't until it gets a solid install base. Ports and remasters are a relatively quick and inexpensive way to add games to the console's library. Best of all, it can be done by smaller or less experienced studios, which means Nintendo's first and second party...
But the original is still widely available, which basically means that if pirates don't mind a few bugs here and there, as well as some weird animations, they still get to play the game. This will do nothing to benefit legitimate buyers of the game or Bioware's sales.
Ah nVidia's naming scheme is still in effet.
After releasing two Titan X in a row, and likely noticing that some people were calling the newer ones Titan XP, P for Pascal, they release a new one, this time they called it Titan Xp.
From my personal experience, wishing for a paid MMO to go F2P is basically wishing for said MMO to become significantly worse.
Developers need to make money, and if they can't make it by selling you the game and/or a subscription fee, they will simply nickle and dime, sometimes with some cosmetic goods, but at some point, most offer some Pay2Win mechanics to encourage players to pay more. I'd much rather pay to play a good game than waste my time in a bad one.
I'd say ArmA 3 is a pure military shooter that includes co-op in an open world. It also has vehicles, a large weapon variety and PvP modes on top of solid mod support.
I quite liked the GR beta, but it's not as unique as it claims to be.
Hopefully at E3 we will finally know what they are working on. And, with some luck, other Nintendo first and second party studios will also unveil some big games for the Switch.
Nintendo is sitting on plenty of unused IPs, and they also have some very talented developers working on their platforms, but they rely too much on the same few IPs and some studios are not used to their full potential. I hope Retro's project doesn't fall into this category.
185d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment
I understand his point that Titanfall 2 wouldn't run on the Switch, however, I would imagine that had they been able to do it, it would have been a pretty nice way to give Titanfall some room to grow. Titanfall's big issue is that it was sandwiched between two giant franchises, Battlefield and Call of Duty. With neither of these announced on the Switch, Titanfall could have been unopposed, which might have helped it develop a following on this platform.
The best version will be the Switch one in terms of performance, and having the ability to play it on the go is also pretty nice. I wouldn't advise buying a Switch only to play Zelda, but if you have both platforms, I don't see much of a reason to play the Wii-U one over the Switch version.
I wish EA would go with Titanfall 2 instead. I understand that Battlefield is a much bigger franchise, and that BR1 has pretty mush destroyed Titanfall 2 in sales, but the shooting is much smoother and feels better in Titanfall than in BF1. There's also the fact that it'd be much easier to make a true competitive mode in T2 than in BF1.
Price is relative, it won't sell no matter of inexpensive it is if the specs and the games aren't there, and it could sell very well at a higher price point if they are. I'd much rather spend 3-400$ for a well designed console with solid battery life and specs that will allow it to remain relevant for a few years than waste 250$ on a weak home console that can't be used for more than an hour on its battery.
Obviously, if Nintendo can do both, that would be ...
If true, Zelda missing the Switch launch would be quite disappointing. Packing Splatoon with the platform on the other hand is a great idea as it would ensure a healthy player base for this multiplayer focused game.
329CAD for a beefed up portable Wii-U is something I'd buy with no hesitation.
Hopefully the Switch kills the 3DS, doing so would mean that Nintendo could focus on one platform as opposed to 2.
The Switch needs all the first party support it can get.
I'm pretty sure we can see a cartridge being inserted in the device in the video.
I wouldn't mind them adding some select mw2 and mw3 maps. It could be interesting to turn this remaster into a best of type of collection over the next couple of years.
Battlefield has received plenty of praise from those who have played it, Titanfall 2 on the other hand has received a mixed reaction from those who participated in the technical test. Battlefield has been around for ages now and is a very well known IP, Titanfall 2 isn't, or at least, not as much. I really don't understand why EA would be more optimistic about Titanfall 2. It's almost as if those in management who wanted to shoot down a pre-WW2 Battlefield still can't get behi...
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.