https://nintendoeverything.com/igar...ch-version-to-be-as-bad-when-it-was-released/
Even Iga admits it's bad!
Even Iga admits it's bad!
Last edited:
-
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.
Iga on Bloodstained ROTN's Switch version: "we didn’t expect it to be as bad when it was released"
- Thread starter Mega Man Zero
- Start date
They shouldn't be, I post a link to them yesterday:
The Switch version, to my knowledge, was an entirely externalized port. Unfortunate to know that even despite this I believe most users purchased the Switch version.
I would imagine the internal goals for his team was the quality on PC/PS4/Xbone and hoping the stars would align for Switch. Remember, they promised a Wii U version of the game, so one can only grasp how terrible that would have been given the Switch port.
OP
OP
This game was in development for a while and Switch Specs have been known for over 3 years - you must have been quite off-hand to just expect it to turn out well without much optimization.
Especially sad considering the Castlevania portable history and the game likely performing (commercial) best on Switch.
Especially sad considering the Castlevania portable history and the game likely performing (commercial) best on Switch.
So, he just gave the source to the people who did the port and just forget about it? Didn't even check to see if the game was in an acceptable state before it released? Because that's what it sounds like to me.
Let s not forget iga s budget is not wholly crowdfunded... a huge part is secured by other means. It may not have been his call to go beyond the first delay for the switch platform...
We don t know and never will I guess.
Some future story might give us a timeline of communication between the main studio and the port house... it s possible initial demos lacking effects were performing well, and only late addition of the visual flare creepled the product...and it was too late to warn investors who refused to postpone a second time and preferred to stick to the summer release fearing competition in fall.
We don t know and never will I guess.
Some future story might give us a timeline of communication between the main studio and the port house... it s possible initial demos lacking effects were performing well, and only late addition of the visual flare creepled the product...and it was too late to warn investors who refused to postpone a second time and preferred to stick to the summer release fearing competition in fall.
a shame that such a good game is tarnished by technical issues. just recently got it on pc and its been scratching that castlevania itch like no other game managed to do. almost sad that i am close to finishing it lol. when it is fixed on switch its a must get for sure. only thing that still baffles me is the art direction / graphics. not the prettiest game by far
Well, Wayforward's there to fix it. Weird how they got the time, considering they're making and releasing so many games right now.
Still though. If you externalize work, you still need to approve of it in the end. At least, that's how it should work.
User Warned: Lazy dev rhetoric, trolling
You got studios getting The Witcher 3 up and running on Switch and these guys can't even get a 2D platformer running well, lol. Reeks of incompetence.
Or, or, or...
Game dev is really hard, and having a brand new game releasing on hardware that's not to spec with the rest of the platforms your game was being optimized for isn't a super easy process.
Also, Bloodstained on Switch wasn't a port released years after the original. The team porting Switcher 3 has had plenty of time to optimize the game specifically to run on Switch, which is a very different endeavor indeed compared to "have the game ready to release around the same time as the rest of the platforms, in spite of performance issues".
Last I checked, Bloodstained on Switch was being ported by the same team in charge of getting the game out on PS4, XB1, and PC as well. That's also very different from the development of Switcher 3, Wolfenstein 2, or Doom, all of which have teams that specialize in porting games to unconventional platforms.
Maybe, but there are plenty of studios that port games to the Switch just fine and there's nothing seemingly that ambitious visually about Bloodstained that I think excuses poor performance.
To be honest, i think IGA should just work with Wayforward as the main dev for his next game(s). It feels they came in too late in Bloodstained's development to really fix stuff before release.
So we've moved from "lazy dev" to "incompetent dev" now eh?
The reality is that this is a small studio, the game was obviously not designed for Switch as the lead platform. And there is a big gap in hardware power, so it requires a lot of optimisation to get the game to run nicely. Something they clearly didn't allow the necessary time or resource to do, which Iga is admitting. They probably should have delayed the Switch version.
They did get away with it, there is too much sentiment of forgiveness for Iga and friends when they totally delayed the Switch port 1 week to hide how shit it was.
Ultimately you're responsible for the product you put out. I'm sure there's a sad story behind every poorly made game, movie, album etc. about why things went bad, but ultimately if you're the creator, it's your job to ensure it doesn't get to that point and if it does, then you don't release the product.
Iga's talking like the first time he saw the game was when it hit the eShop or something. Whether or not it was handled externally is no reason for there not to have been careful oversight the whole way up to release. As a backer who changed systems to the Switch version and is still waiting on performance patches, this statement is really frustrating to hear.
I bought the switch version and kinda regret it. Still hoping for a mythical patch.
I was actually pretty fine with the latency (or I got used to it). My main issue with the switch version is that it looks so low res and muddy.
The character models anyway. This is from docked I'm pretty sure and it really sucks that I cant clearly see Miriam nor her familiars properly. The way the game is made, they're already so far away, so things being muddy and unclear on top of that hurts it for me. Wish I had bought the PS4 version instead.
I just wanted to play a Castlevania again on handhelds like the GBA/DS days. From what I've played (Double jump guy was the last boss I beat), it's a very solid game, with strong aspects like the OST and enemy/level design. Shame I bought the worst version.
EDIT: Here's a handheld comparison I took just of the save room.
I was actually pretty fine with the latency (or I got used to it). My main issue with the switch version is that it looks so low res and muddy.
The character models anyway. This is from docked I'm pretty sure and it really sucks that I cant clearly see Miriam nor her familiars properly. The way the game is made, they're already so far away, so things being muddy and unclear on top of that hurts it for me. Wish I had bought the PS4 version instead.
I just wanted to play a Castlevania again on handhelds like the GBA/DS days. From what I've played (Double jump guy was the last boss I beat), it's a very solid game, with strong aspects like the OST and enemy/level design. Shame I bought the worst version.
EDIT: Here's a handheld comparison I took just of the save room.
OP
OP
Probably their carney-ass publisher, 505 Games, who tried to cover up the horrible performance people noticed at PAX by saying the units were overheating.
Always nice to see the lack of knowledge about video games dev in a video games forum.
Release a bad product and you get a bad reputation especially when other companies are able to manage just fine in similar situations. It works that way in basically every industry, gaming isn't any different.
Yep, and there is no excuses, at all. For exemple, Moonlighter wasn't ready when all versions released and they delayed it.
Nothing in your post is about reputation. It is just a lazy comment showing you know nothing about game dev.
ArtPlay is a small studio that had to contract out a bunch of other developers to take on various other development duties. They're not made of money, nor do they likely have the manpower that big publishers like Bethesda and CD Projekt have.
You're not thinking in relative terms. All you've done is draw a line from one product to another and effectively said "the circumstances for which these games were made and ported are the same."
Switch version was the version i wanted, even with the 30fps. I end up buying it on the PC version, which was obviously the best version above all but the switch version was always in my heart. Sadly i couldn't support it. Going forward they better prioritize a Switch version, since handheld Metroidvania have always been a major thing for gamers such as myself.
Honestly, this game is graphically and technically simple. It should run fine on Wii.
All versions have technical issues, but they are more apparent on the Switch version, because the other consoles have more power to hide most of the mess.
Perhaps Wayforward is able to clean and optimize the code, should be boost performance on every hardware.
All versions have technical issues, but they are more apparent on the Switch version, because the other consoles have more power to hide most of the mess.
Perhaps Wayforward is able to clean and optimize the code, should be boost performance on every hardware.
I bought the switch version and kinda regret it. Still hoping for a mythical patch.
I was actually pretty fine with the latency (or I got used to it). My main issue with the switch version is that it looks so low res and muddy.
The character models anyway. This is from docked I'm pretty sure and it really sucks that I cant clearly see Miriam nor her familiars properly. The way the game is made, they're already so far away, so things being muddy and unclear on top of that hurts it for me. Wish I had bought the PS4 version instead.
I just wanted to play a Castlevania again on handhelds like the GBA/DS days. From what I've played (Double jump guy was the last boss I beat), it's a very solid game, with strong aspects like the OST and enemy/level design. Shame I bought the worst version.
EDIT: Here's a handheld comparison I took just of the save room.
The menu models and character models in conversations also look like shit on Xbox One X. Seems like they will never finish that Xbox One X patch.
I started playing the game on Switch and it wasn't unplayable (IMO), but I decided to shelve it and wait for this patch. As a backer, I would be lying if i said I didn't kind of wish I had gotten it on a platform that it ran better, but I know it would be far less likely to be finished. Can't beat the portability.
...I mean, notwithstanding me shelving it until they fix it.
...I mean, notwithstanding me shelving it until they fix it.
That quote makes it sound like he saw it for the first time when it released. The switch port was a shame and how it was delayed to avoid bad press was sad. I am just sad the game still isnt fixed
