Great for people who've never played it and only own a Switch. I prefer W2 over 3 but just let these people enjoy the game.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
The Witcher 3: Complete Edition announced for Nintendo Switch, coming 2019
- Thread starter vestan
- Start date
- Status
Honest answer: because I don't own a ps4 nor a Xbox one as I'm done with gaming at home (two kids, one of them a newborn and crazy shifts). It's my only way to play this game so I'm good.
That this is a reality is a miracle. Perhaps it's been explained, but how is this possible when 60 FPS Bloodstained was unachievable? Thanks, bye.
Reading this thread you would think people want the game to perform badly just so they can say 'I told you so'
Wouldn't matter if it was a 1:1 or a solid port, they'd still complain...some people just won't get it
There's absolutely quite a few people wishing for that, make no mistake.
It's tough to compare such different games. People have referred to Assassin's Creed 3 performing as a reason why this would be impossible, but then they neglected strong ports like DQXI, MK11, Doom and Wolfenstein 2. In the end, a strong effort towards porting the game on Switch will make such games possible. Square Enix did it with DQXI, and it is now looking like an incredibly beautiful game for the Switch. The amount of resources and time poured into a port, along with the proficiency of the studio porting the game, will make a big difference as to how the port comes out.
Is it confirmed the entire game and DLC is all on the cartridge-no download required for physical?
Uh, for a start the development team size at cd project red dwarfs the small indie team working on bloodstained?
So weird how negative people are on this for merely existing. Think it looks like trash compared to whatever you played it on? Then don't play it maybe?
I actually really want a port of Gwent and Thronebreaker, so hopefully they come later.
That looks pretty good actually. People should not forget what kind of hardware it's running on.
Does it have to look pretty? I mean the gameplay and story alone make this game great. Graphics are over rated anyways
looks good for Switch standards,but looks pretty bad to whoemever has played the PC or X1/PS4 versions
So what you are saying is because the game looks 'bad' (notice the quotation marks?) that it ruins the gameplay? Sorry people that play previous gen games; those games have terrible gameplay now, according to this poster...
After Xenoblade 2 I'm fine with graphics taking a hit if gameplay remains solid. So long as the audio isn't borked I just want talk to the characters and play on the go. Did someone mention who's porting this yet?
It not to come to Switch at all, now they have to settle for the next best thing. It not looking as nice as the other versions.
If they can get it running at stable 30fps it's a win. But dude, BOTW struggled on switch, how can it handle this?
That looks damn good to me, comparing how much power switch has.
I think the gameplay experience includes the visuals, and therefore that poor visuals can negatively impact the gameplay experience.
I'm fucking hyped. I'll be buying this game for a third time on a third system looks like haha.
The game is already mediocre and I played it on ultra detail on my HIGH END PC. They should have just ported Gwent, the best part of the witcher 3 anyway. The rest is mediocre.
Seemed to me that the graphics were stylized to fit the Switch instead of simply downgraded. I though it looked very respectable given the console's specs.
Thought for a minute about double dipping, as I never played the DLCs on PS4 and this version includes both of them. Too many other games, though, so "double dipping" isn't gonna be part of my vocabulary for a while.
Thought for a minute about double dipping, as I never played the DLCs on PS4 and this version includes both of them. Too many other games, though, so "double dipping" isn't gonna be part of my vocabulary for a while.
Shouldn't we maybe wait to see how it runs and looks before declaring victory?
I'm still in awe that the whole game and all DLC is on the cart. I really want to know if they're using a 32Gb cart and if Nintendo takes the bullet and gives them to CDPR for cheap.
Btw. the first one who recreates the Geralt in bathtub scene while playing the Witcher 3 in a bathtub gets internet fame.
Btw. the first one who recreates the Geralt in bathtub scene while playing the Witcher 3 in a bathtub gets internet fame.
Unless you've played it at 60fps 4K with a fuckload of graphics mods, you really haven't experienced this game at all.
I don't actually believe that, but I have graphics modded it to hell on my PC and I just haven't gotten into it yet. With that said, I'll probably get it on switch because it's way easier to get into games on that platform for me.
Because the first 2 games might be easier to port and it gives the player a much better understanding of the world and the witcher lore when they play W3?
I played 1 after 3 and that was a mistake.
Why is this thread so large lol!!
It looks like the Witcher 3 and if they got it to run in a playable form then bravo to the devs. It looks better than I expected as well.
It looks like the Witcher 3 and if they got it to run in a playable form then bravo to the devs. It looks better than I expected as well.
LOL
I love how folks keep moving goal posts. First it was that the listing of TW3 for Switch was an obvious mistake because the Switch could never run it. And then when it became more likely that it would happen people were saying it would look and run like crap. And now it's been confirmed and you're gonna wait for a DF review before relenting. Some people hate to admit they're wrong. wow
Digital Foundry could sing praises about this port and people here would still have a problem with its existence
- Status