I don't think it would be, what probably would happen is that the game got ported and Activision would just make you re-buy all the DLC again instead of having a comprehensive package like a GOTY edition.
-
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.
Are we ever going to see Call of Duty on a Nintendo console again?
- Thread starter Masterspeed
- Start date
I don't think it would be, what probably would happen is that the game got ported and Activision would just make you re-buy all the DLC again instead of having a comprehensive package like a GOTY edition.
Outside of years in which a R* game releases it's the biggest game every year
I was mainly talking about stuff like Fortnite, Warframe, and Rocket League. Even in those cases, the Switch version would be lacking in terms of how easy it is to make parties, voice chat, and so on but that's expected as a lot of online features are lacking. It's not as if the Wii versions of CoD had online parity. Not having online parity isn't the same as the online giving them problems with bringing the game over or support it with DLC and updates
The Switch version would have stuff cut down drastically or even missing, much like the Wii versions of CoD. Again, no one is expecting parity here. Your later point is precisely why I brought up the lack man power and lack of interest in bringing the game over to the Switch. It'd be too much of an undertaking in this day and age for a system that's too far removed in terms of power, unlike before where they actually had spare teams
They should absolutely do a MW or Blops classic collection or something.
The newer games are way too technically advanced for the Switch. They're still essentially arena shooters but the effects and models involved are top notch. The PS4 can barely handle the player lobby of Blops 4 for Christ sakes.
Only thing holding them back is probably their studios are constantly pumping out content for the current game or working on the next.
Trusting their flagships to a contracted studio might not be worth the risk.
The newer games are way too technically advanced for the Switch. They're still essentially arena shooters but the effects and models involved are top notch. The PS4 can barely handle the player lobby of Blops 4 for Christ sakes.
Only thing holding them back is probably their studios are constantly pumping out content for the current game or working on the next.
Trusting their flagships to a contracted studio might not be worth the risk.
The last time I touched the online was six? months after launch. I never had trouble finding any matches. IIRC it's the best selling Western Vita game by a a fair margin, though I am no sales expert.
As someone which is a fan of the first three Call of Duties and actually understands why 4/Modern Warfare exists, god I hope not. Currency destroyed the game.
I mean, battlepass, lootboxes, separated microtransactions and a separated currency with all above for the Zombies mode? That doesnt fit a Nintendo console, like, at all.
I mean, battlepass, lootboxes, separated microtransactions and a separated currency with all above for the Zombies mode? That doesnt fit a Nintendo console, like, at all.
Thing is not having online parity is a much bigger reason to not port it than it was back then. With the Wii the lacklustre online really only cost them the potential sales of a few DLC packs; with the Switch the lacklustre online could cost them millions in lost micro-transaction, season pass, and DLC revenue.
OP
OP
I used to work in retail and so many people bought game. It was the only vita my manager had to order because it was the only vita game that actually sold.
Honestly the main reason imo is that they would have to make a version of the game for Switch and they may consider that to much of an investment for a system they dont know will have a good enough attach rate.
I would like to see it though, maybe this year will be the one idk.
EDIT: just thought about how the switch infrastructure isnt even that well supported enough for mtx and other shit.
I would like to see it though, maybe this year will be the one idk.
EDIT: just thought about how the switch infrastructure isnt even that well supported enough for mtx and other shit.
But why would they not be able to put microtransactions and DLC and season passes on the Switch? That's what I'm trying to get at. The later two would of course be paired back in terms of modes or even content but the former? Not sure why they wouldn't be able to have those in their fullest
The development story behind it is fascinating. Basically, Sony signed a deal to bring Call of Duty to the Vita. Neversoft tried to port the full game over but couldn't get the engine running. Activision owed Sony a game, so they signed the folks behind the shitty Resistance Vita game to stick their assets on the Resistance engine and get something out in six months. That's why there was only a logo, not a trailer, at the E3 where the game was announced.
I was really into the Vita stuff at the time and remembered hearing the rumor before that year's E3, so watching that whole thing play out was a tragedy.
It would fill a massive hole in the Switch's lineup so I hope they do soon.
COD was a locked 60 FPS on 360 so Switch is probably not that hard
I can't believe we haven't gotten one yet. Shooters on the Switch actually pull pretty good sales from what I've seen. I really really wish they'd port an older game at least. I'd kill for Black Ops 2 on Switch with all its DLC. Honestly, I'd probably drop a cool $60 on that. The Switch is the first handheld I really love shooters on and BO2 is by far my favorite CoD game (and one of my favorite games in general actually).
Not next gen ones.
Ghosts was the last tolerable one. Black ops 3 was 30fps and a mess with no SP
MW4 is rumoured to have large PvE and 4 player coop modes
How about Blops2?
Either way, I'd say the wii versions would be a better analogue considering they were effortful downports to a system that sold a lot of games to people?
The Switch has a massive install base, there are studios that have performed minor miracles with Switch hardware (Panic Button, QLOC, etc.) and GAAS titles have become fairly standard on the platform with titles like Fortnite, Mortal Kombat 11, Paladins, Splatoon 2 and the upcoming DOOM Eternal.
It's technically feasible, financially advantageous and highly anticipated - why not capitalize on that?
Back when I was in my Vita fanboy mode I thought I should do the same just because I desperately wanted to show support for the system. Never did buy it though.
This was why I bought it. I was in full Vita fanboy mode and bought all the AAA titles day 1 because I hoped against hope that more AAA support would come.
Only third party one I didn't regret was NFS. Game was dope.
You'd have to downgrade a lot to the point where it becomes pointless. Hell even in Fortnite alone they don't have the PvE because they couldn't get it to run.
Not every game can be downgraded to fit on the Switch. Not to mention CoD sizes have gotten incredibly large in recent years and will only get larger.
It's not about being able to get that stuff on Switch (though storage space makes it hard), it's about being able to get people buying that stuff on Switch. The Switch has both a lacklustre online offering and a main gimmick that is antithetical to online play so there's a much lower chance of people investing substantial amounts of money into that eco-system. The potential return on investment there is likely too low for Activision to want CoD on the system.
I always thought a CoD game "good port of course" which includes a "local Zombie mode in the go" for Switch would be a money maker.
Well, the biggest third party western support are GaaS titles (Fortnite, Paladins, , Warframe, Smite, FIFA...)
Fortnite, Paladins, Smite and Warframe are F2P titles with comparatively low development costs and graphical demands compared to CoD. Fifa is the same but with a $60 up-front cost and an increased single-player component.
I never said that GaaS titles can't work on Switch, just that CoD itself is not a GaaS title that I think Activision will see as worthwhile on Switch.
I'm only addressing the GaaS element. The Switch has several GaaS titles and CoD has a $60 upfront cost like FiFa...
Now that I can understand, albeit I'd imagine it's less so that the main gimmick is anti ethical to online gaming, seeing as I think most tend to play games, even on portables, in areas with WiFi, and most folk are playing online games on the Switch without seemingly minding the shitty online enough, but perhaps more to do with the Nintendo audience not being as into microtransactions and what have you. That being said, I don't know how much revenue the likes of Fortnite and what have you are bringing in on the Switch
At some point yes. Not anytime soon I think, but maybe. They probably think the return is too small to care about making a whole different version for it.
Activision are a business. They exist primarily to make money for their shareholders. The only reason COD isn't on Switch is because Activision don't think it's a profitable enough investment. It's not some weird personal reason where they're prepared to sacrifice profit just to 'prove a point'.
Yes, and not all games can be boiled down to a series of checks on a checklist. Just because CoD is a GaaS doesn't mean you can compare it to every other GaaS and just because it has a $60 price tag doesn't mean you can compare it to other games with a $60 price tag.
Yeah it's not 100% antithetical but there's also less reason to buy an almost exclusively online game like CoD (now) just to play it on the go; you'd pretty much be limited to local wireless play, zombies and the campaign (which itself is gonna be better on another platform).
Fortnite, Warframe, etc can't really be compared because with them being F2P (and the kind of F2P where all content can be accessed without paying) there's no barrier-to-entry so the potential losses that come with the Switch's flaws are much lower.
Nintendo's carved out a comfortable market that doesn't overlap much with CoD's audience. I don't think we'll see it.
I don't get the "X developer was just so burned by the Wii U" arguments anymore. Maybe the first year, sure, but Switch is going to be 50+ million deep this time next year, and it's dominant audience is 18-34 year old males. Pretty clear the two systems have different trajectories at this point.
Yea. It would make money on Switch, but the money and manpower might as well just go into their established model.
Wouldnt bet on it... though probably not a current release anyway.. could see a remaster perhaps..
I think it would do well enough to be worth the time for the developers to make a port this time around. Could definately do better than the Wii versions did. I guess the Wii U scared Activision away forever :p
That's both hilarious and sad at the same time. Then again.. Wii U probably was 0.6% of total hardware at the time ;P
I think it would do well enough to be worth the time for the developers to make a port this time around. Could definately do better than the Wii versions did. I guess the Wii U scared Activision away forever :p
That's both hilarious and sad at the same time. Then again.. Wii U probably was 0.6% of total hardware at the time ;P
EVER? Yes. As long as CoD remains a multiplat franchise and doesn't have an exclusivity deal, the answer is absolutely. I don't think many AAA devs actively boycott Nintendo. They are probably always looking for an opportunity to be on it, even if, according to the fans, they miss several good ones.
It may or may not be the Switch though when it next happens.
It may or may not be the Switch though when it next happens.
Well it's not as if people are bringing the Switch to the beach or something. You'll almost always be in an area with WiFi if you're bringing an electronic with you, with how important it is these days. Like I've only ever used it portable at home, a friend's place, or on campus. I could understand this point more a decade or so back but not as much these days
This I can somewhat understand, albeit I'm not sure that the Switch's issues would much more egregious for most folk with CoD
The Switch audience is not strictly the same as previous Nintendo handhelds or consoles, actually. Another common misconception, along with "expensive GaaS wouldn't succeed on Switch" pervasive in this thread.
So, you are saying that the reason why it isn't on the system are specific to CoD and not because the Switch is ill suited for GaaS titles in general? I agree with that.
18 to 34 males demo doesn't overlap much with CoD?
If Activision thought it would be profitable, they'd do it. Hell, they turned Neversoft, the team behind Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk, into a studio that was dedicated SOLELY to making maps for this darn game.
An entire studio dedicated to making maps. Adding Nintendo Switch to the mix should be well within their technological and budgetary constraints.
An entire studio dedicated to making maps. Adding Nintendo Switch to the mix should be well within their technological and budgetary constraints.
I have a feeling that Mobile Call of Duty game that's coming to Android will find itself on the Switch. It's F2P and might help compete with Fortnite?