Rumour: Porting Steep to the Switch Is Posing a Steep Challenge

I always wanted to play this on PS4 and never had a chance. I wouldn't mind playing it on Switch.

PS4 version is already going pretty cheap. By time this comes out on Switch itll be bsrgain bucket on PS4 and higher than top price on Switch. So pass.

I'm guessing changing it from an always-online game with lots of regular updates to a more offline experience is probably creating lots of little bugs, hopefully they'll sort them out as i was planning on getting this on the Switch, if it doesn't come i'd love a new 1080 game Nintendo !

I was really looking forward to it. Hope it comes to Switch. I respect them for making the effort either way.

This has me curious, hope it makes the Switch.

Hey Ubisoft, how about ditching a year old port that likely won't sell and give Nintendo Switch owners what they really want and deserve, both South Park RPG games. I would completely forgive not getting Steep in exchange for a South Park: Stick of Truth/The Fractured But Whole release at the same time as the standard release this fall. I'm willing to bet that the South Park games would be WAY easier to port, don't require online BS and would be way better suited to the Switch. Hell, I would even sacrifice Steep AND Rayman "Definitive Edition" (let's be honest, the Wii U version is the true Definitive version and most Nintendo fans have already played it). Make the South Park games happen and scrap the old ports that everyone knows won't sell well. I can't be the only person who thinks this is a MUCH better option and will lead to much better sales on the Switch for UbiSoft.

Need it !!!!

It actually looks really fun. I hope it makes it to the Switch.

Well that's what happens when you try to put something on inferior technical hardware to the ones it's already on, looks like if they do manage to bring it to switch, it will be a gimped port, good on them for trying though

This just shows the age old wisdom that 99,9% of internet refuses to acknowledge.

Porting is not easy.

I really really hope they manage to pull this through since I will definitely get it and I still haven't bought it for any other machine.

You can do it Ubisoft! We believe in you!

(After WiiU and Ubisoft being always the only big hitter to support Nintendo they deserve some love instead of the usual crap they get).

I heard about these troubles weeks ago. No wonder why Ubisoft didn't show the Switch version of this games as E3.

Nintendo should get EA to port SSX from the 360/PS3. Now that’s a snowboarding game.

And now we know why most games will never see the light of day on Nintendo hardware.

If Ubisoft can't get this game to run on the Switch and indeed cancel it, they best have a backup plan for a decent title to port otherwise it will look bad I feel for the Switch. Last thing it needs is less third party support especially from the one western publisher who supports hardware.

Hopefully they will be able to address their issues with porting this. More games are always welcome, even if they are ports (as long as they are well done)

I haven't been interested anyway but this does pose an issue for Switch and it's owners. Probably best to can this project and move on to something else. I'm looking Forward to Starlink but it's probably 2 years from release. I would just hate to see them force the programming of a game that runs bad

I was kind of looking forward to this, but now I worry it will be substandard on Switch, sigh.

Just make a 1080

This game would get a guaranteed purchase if it came to Nintendo Switch for me. Not necessarily at launch but later down the road definitely.

As disappointed as I would be if this failed to materialise, I would be happy with 'deluxe' or 'remastered' versions of so many 360 / ps3 games that missed Nintendo consoles. Better to have improved versions of games as opposed to down graded in my opinion. Most people wanting the new AAA games on a thing the size of a Switch is wanting too much I fear. I love the Switch and the games I play on it simply need to be good...not what everybody else is playing on other consoles lol.

I hope they still release this. But to be fair, when I saw this for the first time on the PSN store for PS4.....it made me want 1080 3 to be developed for Switch.

@RadioHedgeFund it's ok, but it isn't 1080 which was the best snowboarding game ever made

So it's WATCH DOGS all over again...

Hmmm...😑 I will wait and see.

A few months ago it was available for free for a whole weekend on ps4, I played it and wasn't overly impressed so won't be losing any sleep over this one.

Also if they did release it, it'd probably cost about £50 on switch and be available for next to nothing on other platforms which makes it a none starter for most people anyway.

I'd much prefer them to bring us new games rather than be porting old games most people already own elsewhere

@TreonsRealm The Switch isn't Region locked i think. And the South park games are censored in some parts of the world.
Nintendo would maybe have to publish the censored version in that case ?

This was heavily discounted within a week of release on PS4 it's a strange empty game not exactly what you wanna pay £54.99 for. That's how much retailers have it listed for third parties should be bringing new ideas to the switch not this kind of rubbish

I enjoyed this during the free weekend on PC, so I'm still hoping it comes out on Switch.

Likely due to the persistent online component. I do hope they iron out the bugs as that was the reason I didn't buy Steep in the first place anywhere else. Hopefully if they figure out the frame work they will port For Honor as well. I really wanted to play the single player campaign for that game but I can't and refuse to support online only.

Considering the whole "always online" thing Steep does, I can see where the problem is coming from.

Sssso if this doesn't make it would other 3rd party devs give up on making ports of PS4/XBONES games, cause I kinda don't mind that.
I've said it before if there a shiner version available on other consoles then I'll play on them. I don't wanna see the Switch with the same games I want unique games made for it....
@XenoShaun too true!

I wouldn't buy this game, but this worries me re 3rd party content if porting to Switch isn't easy (therefore quick and cheap).

We're not hearing anything on Rayman either, and I do want to pick that up.

Put it on the Wii U.

Ubisoft is still taking the time and effort to attempt a port of Steep onto the Switch, but they won't bring a game like South Park Fractured Butthole to Switch when that game is an offline turn-based RPG with graphics that could probably be rendered on a PS2...

I will probably get this provided it doesn't cost an arm and a leg and isn't too buggy. Is it 1080 though? No. Come on Ninty.

That's what happens when you release weak hardware AGAIN. This is the 3rd generation in a row where it's happened. We haven't had near parity in terms of power since the Gamecube. Little surprise 3rd party support has been dreadful since. They don't want to have to jump through hoops and perform minor miracles to get their games to run. And for what? So that they look awful, miss features, run terribly and as a result, sell poorly.

Erm... software development is hard. Targeting a different infrastructure is hard. That's their job and why they get paid.

to be honest it seems like they are overreacting a bit, still this post has planted some seeds of doubt in me.

Would prefer if they ported South Park. The Switch wouldn't have any trouble running it.

If the N64 can do the brilliant 1080 Snowboarding, then Switch can easily handle a similar game. Dial back the graphics a bit, that's all.

I can't see the appeal of the game and I certainly won't be loosing sleep if it never ended up on the switch.

Plus, the whole thing seems rather contradictory as other developers have stated they were surprised at how easy the switch was to develop on.

I've seen some commenters mention the persistent online element of the game possibly being the issue. If that proves to be true, could this also be behind Monster Hunter World skipping the platform. Just thinking - it may not be a graphics issue.

@jswhitfield8 I wasn’t a massive fan of the N64 original but I did enjoy Avalanche. Technically it was a masterpiece (those rippling clothes in the wind!) but the tracks lasted about 90 seconds each.

For me SSX3 takes the crown for best snowboarding game. They toned down the crazy from Tricky which was great but tiresome and added a lot of nuance to the trick system like boardpress to hold combos and changing axis mid-spin.
The sheer amount of stuff to do on the mountain was nuts, the tracks were lengthy and I loved the half-hour mountain run at the end. I sunk 200 hours into it on the Cube to 100% it all.
And what a soundtrack! Even the DJ wasn’t annoying. I liked his in-universe soundbites; they added to the immersion.

I like that I can still play the most recent SSX on the X1. I hope OG Xbox BC brings SSX3 onto it as well....

@Marios-love-child if it's £40 with all DLC I won't be complaining.

Have not purchased on PS4 as waiting for switch version

Game is boring anyway,much rather have South Park.

Well, if they do succeed, they at the very least will have made a point- if you put the effort in, the Switch can run current gen games. Not all of them, but a significant number.

I love how Nintendo fans are really loud when 3rd parties are absent.

Then someone says they will make/port game of a INSERT GENRE HERE.

Nintendo fans immediately go. "Why didn't you make INSERT PREVIOUS NINTENDO GAME HERE Instead?!?"

Sigh

And for everyone wishing for South Park. I hope that too, but it has absolutely nothing to do with this case.

Sigh

Sometimes I wonder if Nintendo fans really are the reason we never have good things.

@kobashi100 €40 and I will I'd buy it for Switch. It's out on other platforms for a year now. With Nintendo now helping Ubisoft to Port I wonder want Nintendo extras are gonna be in it.

I've hear great things about this game but it's not for everyone. I'll buy it at some point.

But yes, bring Southpark to the Switch please. Seems like it would be an 'easy' port.

It's an already announced failure. It's bad to waste resources on this game. Ubisoft management is missing the point. Make new games for Nintendo Switch and eventually release it on multiple platforms too, it's useless to release an old title already cheap on other platforms.

@Wichtel The censored version is the best because their screen that they have instead of the banned one about sexual violence is far funnier than any gig else in the game.
Coupled with weak RPG mechanics and writing quality nowhere near South Park's clever social commentary best I'm happy to keep avoiding them.

@DESS-M-8 Have you played the SSX Series. I recommend SSX 3.

Remember the Nintendo version of Watchdogs?
Sounds like a similar set of problems with Ubisoft ports.

I remember downloading the beta on PS4 before it released. Each time I opened it, I got errors and was unable to play it. Even after redownloading, I wasn't able to ever get it to run. So basically, I didn't get to play it because the beta didn't work, and that sent a message to me that the game wasn't worth my time.

Also... On the same page as everyone else. I'd much rather have a South Park port.

@ZukutoBen Yes I have, and while they aren't bad, 1080 avalanche is a better game and probably the best snowboarding game ever made

Rather than trying to port on old game that would likely flop as many would either already own it or buy it on another platform for leas Ubisoft should have developed an original game tailored for the Switch.

Development would be a little costlier but os likely to have gone smoother and sold better.

Plus they could have then released it for the other consoles a few years down the line if they really wanted to.

While I wasn't interested in getting this game on the Switch, it's not a good sign if porting games are hard. But, at the same time, it may be harder to port a game already being made, than creating a Switch game at the same time you're creating a game for the PS4/XB1.

@DESS-M-8 I enjoy a lot of Snowboarding games and for a long time SSX 3 was my favourite but then Steep came along and blew it out of the water. 1080 controls differently in both the original and GameCube one and I can see some people preferring that more realistic type of game. Mark McMorris was a major disappointment though and it felt very unfinished. I wouldn't say no to another 1080 snowboarding as I did make a video talking about games that should come back on Switch. https://youtu.be/t_z69BtrtDg

I didn't have any interest in this on PS4/X1 and a Switch port won't change this.
Also considering the apparent online- & sharing focus of the game, it just doesn't strike me as a great portable title in general.
I think as far as these big AAA games go, Switch ports should be released during or around the same time of the PS4/X1 (/PC) version.

Otherwise you get an a) inferior game and b) higher price with c) for the time being smaller community attached d) long after public interested has already faded (for the most part).

Yeah, it's going to be portable, but that is about all it is going to be, and portable is not as benefical to some games as it is for others.

@ZukutoBen

(Nintendo) Games that need to make a return on Switch:

F-Zero
Metroid - Done
1080 3
Wave Race 3
Luigi's Mansion 3
Golden Sun 3
Star Fox 3
Pilotwings 3

Third Party series that need to return to Nintendo hardware

EA Sports
Call of Duty
Final Fantasy
Castlevania
Street Fighter VI
Soul Calibur
Capcom cross over fighting games

I'll pass. Sure, choice is good and the more games releasing for the Switch will always be better, but it's quality not quantity which I favour. Steep even should it not arrive won't be a big miss.

@Joytendo22 yesssssss! Thank you 😊

I was looking forward to this one, but sense it's not coming. Oh well.

I would like to see it on the Switch. It doesn't look very demanding graphically, but maybe it's the scope of the gameworld that's the problem. They might have to add some load screens or cut some areas. But pricing will be tricky.

Steep is a great fit for Switch assuming they can rearchitect around a not-always-online model.

I never bothered with the online aspect - appears to be pvp + leaderboards + challenge events (?); whats the problem here?

I put in around 30hrs on the PS4 and stopped entirely when I heard about it coming to Switch. Fingers crossed...

All I want from Ubisoft is Southpark

Simple solution: Make a new 1080 and you have a snowboarding game.

Concerning a new 1080, they worked up the basic mechanics in BoTW. Why not flesh them out into a new full scale 1080. They spent so many years working on the HD engine for Zelda surely now they can tweak it and bust out a few different games running on it. As you can tell from my avatar I'm all over 1080. Still play the original and avalanche to this day.

Uffff!! This isn't good for the future of the console if true. In terms of third party support that is.

not really a great game so no real loss

SSX Switch sounds good and should be done.

And I thought porting to the Switch was super easy? This is the first time we hear the opposite!

"That's what happens when you release weak hardware AGAIN"

Switch may be the worst offender so far. I mean, Wii offered quite a noticable leap over Gamecube in the graphics-department. Same with Wii u compared to Wii. Switch however, it just looks Wii u level. I don't see and leap (maybe slightly with Mario+Rabbids, slightly). Its just a reskinned Wii u/nvidia shield, wich is pretty sad.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE , I get that it's no where near as powerful as the next home console but as a handheld , iits better than most and playable on tv, Nintendo knew they couldn't compete with Sony or Microsoft so they made a new market, suited for their needs. People forget they are Japanese, where handheld devices hold the most weight, they are far more popular so instead of hating it for what it can't do , try look at what it can! Why do you stick around if yo hate what they are doing so much and jump ship and follow one of the other systems instead?

I was really looking forward to this. I understand the challenges about the scope of the game and the always online nature, but I hope the project will not be cancelled, these kind of games would be well suited for the Switch.

I played the demo on ps4 then got a survey from Ubisoft asking why I didn't buy it.

I replied that I was waiting for it to come out on switch.

I'm sick of these dodgy promises. Switch needs core 3rd party games. Otherwise its just another Mario device and I have enough Mario already.

Guys this is Nintendo's fault sadly. They release subpar hardware and are way behind industry standards. I love Ninty but that is the true and the reason why I also have a PS4.

I swear if Nintendo would release a powerful console I wouldn't even touch Sony. But it is what it is.

@TreonsRealm blame Nintendo, not Ubisoft.

would be a good coup for the switch if they manage it and well done to ubisoft for putting in the hours. Maybe with Nintendo's intervention they can figure out a few tricks

@Jessica286 power has nothing to do with it. The engine Ubisoft used is in house and likely was only intended to run on x86/64 Intel/AMD architecture. The PS4 and XBox One are identical to PCs in this fashion. The Switch uses ARM architecture, which is very different.

Seriously, if this was just a power issue, Ubisoft would just turn down the graphics settings. Unreal Engine 4 was designed to work on the Switch as well as PC architecture, and when porting games on that engine, not much has to be sacrificed.

If they can make it work, I've been planning on buying it. If they can't, I am not going to lose any sleep over it

Steep's claim to fame was all the snow deforming nicely and leaving visible trails, as well as the entire mountain being open simultaneously.

If these elements prove too heavy for the switch, too complex to reprogram, or would have to be compromised enough for the vision to break, I could understand why they would cancel it for Switch.

Slightly more pressing might be that Nintendo still won't allow that Ubisoft require players to use Uplay. At least that is my impression so far.

So is it a matter of graphical issues or is it the online component that is the problem? Its not made really clear if both are the issue.

I think that if this game doesn't make it onto switch , you can kiss any chance of other IP using the same engine good bye on switch.

@Ryu_Niiyama Couldn't agree more. I was wincing through much of the EA, Ubisoft, and even Microsoft conferences at the sheer number of persistent world, always-online games. Many games looked good, and I will buy almost none of them as a result of the whole online-only thing. Even BG&E2 is just a big persistent online sandbox mess.

"This is Nintendo's fault for not making the Switch as powerful as the PS4!"

Why do I keep seeing comments like this? Do people not understand that a PS4 in Switch's form factor is currently not feasible or impractical because of heat/battery issues?

@NEStalgia online only is a no deal for me. Much the same as this buy a barebones game and get the rest via paid DLC shenanigans a lot of software companies are pushing.

@Jessica286 I know, I mean it's 2017 and there's like 8 other 1/2" thick 1lb consoles that can play Skyrim or (maybe) Steep on a battery.....

Oh, wait, that's right, Nintendo's is the only one.... It was fair during the WiiU era to mock Nintendo for being behind the tech curve as the system, while cool in concept, didn't bring anything really unique other than the second screen to the world. Switch, though, is AHEAD of the overall tech curve, it just has to sacrifice some level of performance compared to stationary consoles. It's just so silly that everyone keeps comparing it to a PS4, while a PS4 sits tethered to a wall like 80's tech, while Switch is a modern device fitting the "mobile age", as though we don't already know from the past 20 years of laptops that mobility sacrifices power, while being able to appreciate just how LITTLE power was sacrificed for mobility in this case compared to many other mobile devices. It's way more powerful than an X360 or PS3....and it's ~6x4x0.5 inches. Including power supply.

@WiltonRoots Thankfully some people haven't lost all sanity! I mean I don't mind a game that really has to be online being an online game. It's not for me, but if that's how the game is designed by concept, there's nothing wrong with it. Sea of Theives, cool as it looks, I get it, the ONLY gameplay is interacting with other people....it's not for me, but I can't complain it exists. But Steep, BG&E, that new Bioware game, there's simply no reason those games can't and shouldn't be playable without "the cloud." It's "games as a service" simply for the control of it.

If the XBOX One can run this, so can the Switch.

@Henmii Porting is easy when using Unreal Engine 4. Steep uses Ubisoft's custom Snowdrop Engine, so that probably also has something to do with it. But I've read on quite a few other sites, that the problem is only with the always online stuff in the game, so it's not at all a hardware/horsepower related issue of not being able to run the core of the game itself.

That would also be kind of hard to believe, seeing as the game itself isn't really all that heavy on the graphics, and the Switch is more powerful than the Wii U.

@RadioHedgeFund Both SSX and 1080 are great snowboarding games, but SSX is way more over the top, so if you want a snowboard game that is more realistic, then 1080 is the game to play.

Or Amped, if you happen to have a Microsoft console lying around...

@SLIGEACH_EIRE According to other sites, it's only a problem of getting the always online part working properly, so not the game itself. Therefore it's not a hardware power related issue.

@ThanosReXXX sounds like they'll almost have to rethink the game. This will also become an issue as these third party games become even more service based as time goes by.

If the game has been in development for months, how is it that now they can't get it to run on the hardware? That doesn't make sense to me. Of course, I may be mistaken with the development time.

@WiltonRoots The more service based these companies get, the less interest I'll continue to have in them. That's oddly one reason why E3 reinforced Sony as a better place for me than Microsoft....they were one of the few shows that showcased almost entirely offline games. (Heck, even Nintendo is more online than Sony at the moment.) I'll never get the appeal of all media becoming internet driven for no real reason but to make it "social" in some dystopian way.

@MsgBoardGamer It's so true! I really don't understand where this modern thinking that "All platforms are just differently shaped boxes to play all the same games and should be identical in power and library." It doesn't make any sense on any level. They wouldn't all exist if they were to be the same thing. It's as though people think "PC" just sprung out of thin air instead of being the last remaining format from a whole host of competing platforms that became redundant to each other. And for some reason they want all game platforms to filter down to one the same way....and as though they assume that one wouldn't just merge with PC as all other formats have.

@NEStalgia @MsgBoardGamer I get the impression some people want the video game equivalent of VHS. I personally want diversity.
@MsgBoardGamer hit the nail on the head, even though during the 16 bit era both machines had the same games, it didn't exactly equal parity or superiority. Sometimes you needed that Megadrive version because it didn't slow down or sometimes that SNES version was just that little bit better through some minute visual zing. There was no one or the other.

@WiltonRoots Yeah, unfortunately, online play has almost completely taken over as the most important part of a whole lot of genres, which sometimes also means that the single player/offline campaigns of those games are often quite underwhelming, which is a crying shame.

Personally, I don't care all that much for online multiplayer, unless it's with good friends that don't annoy me as much as 99% of the anonymous online gaming populace does, and I hate being forced to do stuff against my will or personal preferences, such as games needing to be "always online".

And if anything, the launch of the Xbox One showed that millions of people feel the same about such an obligation, so why the hell so many companies keep pushing services like this, is beyond me.

And yes, that was a bit rhetorical, because they obviously do it for the profits that can be gained by those very services, but the outrage surrounding the Xbox One launch showed that it is something that they should really reconsider, because if more people get up in arms, stuff like this won't be bought anymore.

And if it will, then the shared IQ of the online gaming community will probably drop like a comet going through the atmosphere, because it will mainly consist of people either too dumb or too lazy to be bothered to think about what's really going on here.

@WiltonRoots "I get the impression some people want the video game equivalent of VHS"

Fortunately for those people, one company's got them covered:

Seriously, though, even VHS didn't spring out of thin air....Beta was the superior platform through and through. I'm amazed the die-hard Sony fans aren't reminded of that often That's still a case of competing platforms failing until it distilled into one.

@MsgBoardGamer the other context with Nintendo's monopoly status was that while "Nintendo gamers didn't have to miss out on (most) games", Sega and other platform gamers missed out on LOADS of games as a result of Nintendo's MANDATORY exclusivity (for 2 years) policy for games on NES. Back then a Nintendo owner got NEARLY everything with some exceptions. Today a Sony owner gets NEARLY everything with some exceptions, except now it's less cut and dry since the dominant Sony is missing the sizeable Nintendo library, and Nintendo misses the fairly sizable (compared to Sega's Genesis era) Sony library.

But yeah, Sonic, Ecco, Toejam, and a variety of others needed my Genesis in use more than my PS4 has been in use, to be honest

@ThanosReXXX Absolutely. I don't think they do this stuff "for the profits from those services" though. Most of them aren't charging subscriptions, and most of the DLC would be bought by online players regardless of the always-online. The only real reasons for the 3rd parties pushing it is trying to cash on on the "social" aspect of game fandom that's the current fad (for a portion of the audience), but mostly as a form of pseudo DRM and analytics gathering. Ubi started the always online single player thing with AC on PC (and it didn't go down very well....) A lot of it is sheer cost saving, as well, being able to develop the game world on the fly later, based on success rather than ship it in the box. It seems to be this year's fad to take otherwise single player worlds and make them MMO-like. I don't know that we'll shake always-online as barely obscured DRM, ever, but I do think the MMO-ification fad will be short lived. Remember when MMOs were going to be the only genre back when Everquest was taking over? Yeah...

@TreonsRealm @TreonsRealm I agree completely. I actually think Steep looks fun, but it's simply not a game that will sell big numbers. I understand they wanted to stick to ports instead of putting more stress on they're current game developers, but why not port over the original South Park RPG? It doesn't make sense to me. But hey, they have Mario + Rabbids which will undoubtedly sell well, so I guess everything that's not that is overkill for them.

@NEStalgia Other profits: marketing, commercial, data mining and such. Not all means to gain profit immediately involve money. It's mostly long-term strategies where always online is concerned.

If there wasn't any benefit to it for the companies involved, then they wouldn't be pushing it, since setting up the infrastructure to provide for these services isn't exactly done for free either...

The Problem is mostly Nintendo not having there online service not fully available on the Nintendo Switch, and Ubisoft having to make a work around for it.

@NEStalgia P.S. Why take the VHS/BetaMax comparison as an example? There's a much more recent example of a superior format that lost from a lesser one due to a commercial push by the parties involved, namely HD DVD.

@ThanosReXXX Yeah. I'm not sure what dataming can be gleaned through console play beyond just analytics of gameplay, but yeah that one crossed my mind early. I find that whole trend hideously disturbing.

I did VHS because he brought up VHS as the analogy for uniform gaming

@NEStalgia Yeah, I know, just teasing. But it is a great and recent example, though. HD DVD is far superior in multiple ways, but the backside-hats at Sony didn't want it, so they convinced other parties in the media partnership to go with Blu-ray instead. Only now with UHD Blu-rays and the related players are they catching up to what HD DVD was already capable of.

@NEStalgia And you'd be surprised what data can actually be gleaned from online presences, or other forms of data mining. Back in 2001, when I was still working at HP, we used to do stuff like that all the time, and also by using hard copy material, such as brochures, questionnaires and so on.

But agreed, it is disturbing and far as I'm concerned also highly unwanted.

@ThanosReXXX As I recall, they took a page out of the VHS organization's playbook from defeating Beta and bribed the porn industry to standardize on BluRay. Everything fell into place shortly after that, unsurprisingly.

I'm just thinking in context of gaming. They have your location, address data, etc. from your account. Certainly they can tie that into other information they purchase on you from data resellers. But what information could they gain from you merely playing Steep online that would have any saleable/advertising value? I'm sure there's soemthing insidious I hadn't thought of.

Honestly as everything becomes "internet of things" and the consumer is more and more the product for sale, the less I see out of the trap, and want to just become a crazy old hermit.

@NEStalgia What data? That's easy: behavior, much like in analytics concerning web shops and such, so factors like playtime, preferences, skills etc. to be able to offer matching content/DLC, game passes and so on. And in general to match game development to, because the majority rules, so the biggest percentages get used to act upon.

@ThanosReXXX I was thinking more in terms of saleable profile building more than generic metadata for targeting actual game related advertising and analytics for how the game is used for further development information. That's not really objectionable use to me. But it also doesn't actually require always on connections, either, it just needs to phone home.

I can't say I like the idea of gathering information for catering to majority play styles and such....mob rule ruins the real world, I don't want it to ruin the game world too by making it a mirror of real world politic, but it's not "offensive" in the sense of profile building datamining.

I really don't know what to do with the present state of the world where most people are oblivious to and/or ok with profile building surveillance on them. That ti's just "normal" now is disturbing.

Steep is somewhat demanding in the graphics department, AND has a proprietary engine, AND is always online. Three way difficult. Also: if ubisoft do manage to port the always-online part, I am most definately NOT buying it. Also: they better include all dlc if they want full price from me. Steep gold xbox is already priced at half of botw, so there is the question of possible ROI on the port...
Otherwise: i was really, really stoked to buy it! Bought Arms instead. Happy.

@MsgBoardGamer I'm guessing the people that want that are mostly just being cheap. They want to buy one platform and get every game. Which is silly, a PS4 or X1 is ~$250. For the price of 4 of all those games they want they could get the other platforms. If they're not willing to spend $250 for the platform, how many of those games do they actually intend to buy?

But it's a weird delusion that seems to assume that both, if Nintendo just built a $500 high powered PC they'd become the monopoly again, and/or if Sony just becomes the monopoly, Nintendo will happily crank out games and publish on Sony. And they don't even consider all the other odd games out in limbo that are Nintendo or Sony centric niche games.

@NEStalgia Yeah, "normal" is the new word for "too lazy to be bothered to find out what's what and stand up and protest against it, because how bad can it actually be, right?"...

But trust me, those things I mentioned are literally worth millions, much like with the web shop example that I also mentioned. It is what a big part of the online world is built upon and restructured by, when necessary.

And it doesn't stop with one game, so all the data mined thru Steep, when used in combination with the data mining concerning profiles and accounts, is a true goldmine for dozens of companies and their partners, make no mistake.

It's not that I defend or like it, but it is what it is, and all that you can do against it, is less online gaming, and not hang around web shops any longer than necessary...

@ThanosReXXX Yeah...at some point most people started assuming that every company and government organization is 100% benevolent, and symbiotic and really just has everyone's best interests at heart. "Whatever they're doing can't be bad! It won't affect me at all, in any way. It'll affect someone else, maybe, but not me! It's all harmless. " As though any snapshot of any period of any society in human history could give even the slightest impression that were true.

Somewhere, in some circle of the netherworld, Goebbels and the former leadership of the KGB are sitting around thinking "holy heck, how did we not THINK of that?!"

For web shops, it all makes sense ,and being PC based it has a lot more metadata lying around for them to link to other things. That one I'm a bit more clued in. The in-game data, my brain can't quite wrap around profitability on. I know, I'm dense because I'm not as morally bankrupt as the people that rule the world now. I can't think "Why would I pay millions for data about how players are playing a snowboarding video game?!"

@NEStalgia And personally, I definitely DO find all such "efforts" objectionable. I don't want or need it, and I never asked for it.

Much like when Google kept spamming me with the very trip that I had already taken, or the shoes that I'd already bought. Luckily, I haven't been bothered by such idiocy anymore ever since I started using Ublock Origin nowadays, the best adblocker around, now that Adblock Pro has succumbed to commerciality...

@NEStalgia As for wrapping your head around it: it's staring you right in the face, but you seem to hinder your own realization of that by putting labels such as "PC" and "console" on it, while those aren't important or relevant at all.

It's the common denominator that's important, and that is being online, which is not restricted or differentiable by a specific platform.

So, data mining from a web shop is in essence no different from data mining from an online gaming community.

EDIT:
And maybe I should have elaborated a bit on the whole online behavior part in relation to games that I mentioned earlier. It's not so much about one game that you play, that's only part of the equation. For any particular game, they can gauge playtime, skill and preference for certain parts of that game, but they can match that (as I said before) to your profile and other games you play, data that is often exchanged/sold between the various data miners.

In the end, that makes a reasonably complete profile/foot print of a gamer and his likes/dislikes, and with that, they can do a hell of a whole lot of preemptive/predictive campaigning in all kinds of ways.

curse of the wii u strikes again.... oh now it's starting on the switch too

This game is going to bomb on the Switch, if it is ever released in the first place. Steep didn't exactly set the charts on fire when it launched on the PS4/XBO/PC back in December 2016. It's success on the Switch will be even further minimalized.

Again, I think Ubisoft should take all this time and effort into porting South Park instead of Steep onto the Switch, but since they believe Nintendo fans don't buy M-rated games after the failure of Assassin's Creed/Splinter Cell/Watchdogs on the Wii U, they chose to make life hard for themselves and decided to port a much more niche, graphically intense, and online-only game on the Switch.

Bear with me, this may be a little long, but I wanted to give my two cents on the state of the Nintendo Switch's hardware as well as 3rd party support and what it can/may look like in the coming future. To begin I am going to start with the Nintendo 64. This was possibly the first point in the traditional console "generations" that Nintendo had to actually worry about the competition (other than SEGA), hot off the NES and SNES Nintendo was riding high, but Sony after their falling out with Nintendo dropped a bomb on the industry with the original Playstation. The superior disc format was well as an easy to develop for platform turned the industry upside down if you will because it ended up selling over 100 million compared to the N64s paltry 33 million. So going into the next generation Nintendo had come off a system viewed in their eyes as a failure, even though Nintendo and Rare released countless gems on the 64. Before we move onto the next generation it was important to keep in mind that Nintendo lost significant 3rd party support from Square Enix during this generation. Next we had the GameCube. IMHO one of the best consoles of all time, but at the same time was another swing and a miss for Nintendo in terms of sales. The system couldn't even beat newcomers Microsoft and the Xbox, and again Sony absolutely destroyed the competition with the PS2. From a sales standpoint the GC failed but from a software standpoint it definitely held its own and also got some siginificant 3rd party support from EA, Ubisoft, and others. Gamecube was the last time nintendo owners got full-fledged EA sports games. Prince of Persia and Stars Wars games, as well as Sega's support really helped flesh out the gamecubes library of games. The GC was still made with gamers in mind and was a system with gamers in mind, but it just couldn't escape the perception that Nintnedo was a kiddie console. Growing up in this and the 64's era I can attest that many kids thought nintendo was for kids while xbox and playstation 2 was for gamers, even though this wasn't really true till the next generation. The Wii, Xbox 360, and PS3 Generation is one that had enourmous impact on the gaming industry as a whole. This is when Nintnedo decided to go in a completely alternative route to all the other companies. Before Nintendo competed with the other companies because of their software, but now with motion controlled gaming and a severly underpowered system compared to the 360 and PS3, Nintendo took the biggest risk they ever took and it paid off. The Wii appealed to non-gamers , the Wii had people talking about Nintendo again, the stigma of it being a kiddie console was still there, but the appeal was so huge and Nintnedo 1st party titles ended up pushing the thing over 100 million units. So Nintendo made a ton of money doing it their own way and probably thought they were hot poop. Unfortunately for them the Wii generation lost most "gamers" that werent complete fanboys of Nintendo, myself included. This started the trend where most good 3rd party titles came to 360 and PS3 and possibly a gimped port got sent to the Wii because 3rd parties couldnt pass up that install base. I also failed to mention that this was also big because the 360 and PS3 were in HD so if you were serious at all about gaming you were on one of these consoles. As the Wii hype dissipated Nintendo decieded to get ahead of the competition and release their new console a year earlier than the competition, the Wii U. The Wii U baffles me to this day and will forever baffle me. That system had an interesting premise, but when it came down to it Nintendo's hardware was basically stuck in the past generation again. The system actually saw surprising third party support at launch, but once that came and went, the Wii U's game library became a ghost town other than first party titles which Nintendo always does right. The PS4 and Xbox One arrived one year later and blew the Wii U's hardware away and really cemented Nintendo as having gimped hardware. With Nintendo's worst selling console in the rearview Nintendo decided to take another risk. The Nintnedo Switch brought a new element to the table that previous consoles had not (Portability) and that new element is far more useful for gamers than a second screen controller. So far it looks like this risk is paying off for now, but the reality is that the Switch is around xbox one level power, which came out in 2013. The Switch is as powerful as systems that came out 4 years ago. Now this is fine because the reasoning behind that is the portability aspect of the system, but for gamers ,and this is what it is all about, attracting gamers, the system might not have enough power to deliver the experiences they want. Now the system can run amazing games, but in 2017 the Switch cannot run the biggest major 3rd party titles and will be in a situation like the wii where the thing might sell enough to justify publishers to give it games, but the full-fledged copies of those games will continue to be for the other consoles. Personally I have a switch and love it and cant wait for all the Nintendo games and the select 3rd party titles we will be getting, but I can't help but wish the system was a little more powerful so if a 3rd party wanted to bring a game to the switch they could do so withough having to jump through any hoops. With all this in mind this is just my opinion on what I have seen and experienced as well as how I feel the future will go for the switch. Lastly I went through and made a list of games I feel have very little shot of coming to the switch, just to show what kind of games the switch cannot run (whether it be online or performance related)

ROCKSTAR
-GTA V or any future installment
-Red Dead Redemption 2
ACTIVISION
-Destiny 2
-Call of Duty II (Maybe a gimped future version if switch does well)
EA
-Star Wars Battlefront 2
-Titanfall 2
-Mass Effect Andromeda (Not that we want that poop)
-Battlefield 1
-Need for Speed Payback (Maybe a future entry)
-Dragon Age Inquisition (Or any future installment)
-Anthem
-Madden and NHL (at least this year if FIFA does well, maybe)
UBISOFT
-Assassins Creed Origins (I could see a custom switch AC, not mainline entrys though)
-Watch Dogs 2
-Ghost Recon Wildlands
-For Honor
-Beyond Good and Evil 2
-Far Cry 5
BLIZZARD
-Overwatch
-Diablo 3 (I want this so bad, but Blizzard is always online so yea probably not)
BETHESDA (If skyrim does well maybe we could see another title)
-Fallout 4
-Doom
-The Evil Within 2
-Wolfenstein 2
-Dishonered 2
OTHER PUBLISHERS
-The Witcher 3
-Cyberpunk 2077
-Final Fantasy XV
-Rise of the Tomb Raider
-Borderlands 3
-XCOM 2
-Resident Evil 7
-Yakuza series
-Darksiders 3
-Metro Exodus
-Dark Souls (Rumored, but yet to be seen)
-Middle Earth games
-Injustice 2
-Tekken 7
-Street Fighter V

TL;DR The switch is great and all, but the games listed above probably won't show up on the console.

@BravelyDavid Let's not use profanity please.

@ThanosReXXX what i meant by pc vs console was that the console lacks the metadata a pc briwser gives miners about iother unrelated things (ie, walmart can figure out you were searching about a cough on medical sites and were listening to wayne newton's greatest hits for 73 hous straight and know you last logged out to pick up peanut butter carfish on 6/27 from all the pc breadcrumbs that a console won't be able to tie into (they can link it with things that do, but they can't gather more in the console than game data)

Though this stuff is more part of your field than mine. I deal with enterprise. If were mining, its legit to figure out what clients need from us before they call in in full panic and how they need things to work for them to provide better service they're already paying for, not to sell them something else. So wrapping my head around sales values doesn't come naturally

@Joeynator3000 I genuinely didn't notice I let that slip, had to reread my post to see that fine edit.

@BravelyDavid most of those games certainly could run on switch. They all run scalable engines. Always online games could run but wouldn't fit well because they can't be played portable. The other games won't come, not because they can't, but because there's little business reason to port them. MOST switch owners that like those games likely had a PS4/XBone/PC years before Switch even came out. Why spend money porting them to Switch?

@NEStalgia I definitely agree. I would agree that the switch could probably run most games I have listed but with significant performance tweaks such as a reduction in frames per second and resolution, but I guess the point of my post was to get my opinion out there to people who keep asking for these types of games on switch. Just one example, but the guys who made Titanfall 2 were asked about a possible switch port and they literally laughed at the interviewier because they said there was no chance and it could not "fit" on the system. That just makes me think the system would have a hard time with some games, but again I have no technical evidence to prove my point. Now in terms of gamers who like these games I would say there is a market on the switch for them if Nintendo made hardware that could compete, but they didn't, they chose to go their own route and that is completely ok, I still love Nintendo, but just as someone who owned a GameCube and was looking forward to the Revolution sooo much only to be completely let down, I was hoping the switch could be the console that would put Nintendo back on the map completely. I sold my XBONE a year before the switch came out to get the most money for it and because I loved my 3ds at the time. While I had it, I loved the Witcher 3, GTA V, and enjoyed mainline sports games online and would have loved if some of those games could make it to the switch, but its looking like most of those games won't make it. But as you said maybe only a handful of those games I listed would make money on the switch and that is probably the biggest reason as to why they won't come to the switch.

@NEStalgia I know what you meant, but that big difference really isn't there. You can definitely mine more data on a console than game data alone. I already gave you various examples. Underneath a console's Operating System, there are several basic layers that are either based upon or similar to the same layers that operate underneath PC OS'es.

Also, let's not forget all the apps, such as browsers, and video apps like Twitch and YouTube, and of course Netflix. If you use these on your console, you're more than likely to log in with your own account data, so there's some more bread crumbs for ya...

And besides: modern consoles are so much like PC's anyway, so hardware-wise, there's also no difference, except for the Switch of course, but that can be seen as a smart device, and for those too, there are specific methods to mine what you want.

Long story short, all I said previously is completely possible, also on consoles. They don't have to mine the hardware after all, other than the info packets it sends out, and the IP address and such.

Online behavioral patterns and all their useful attributes can be measured in equal quantities on PC's, consoles AND smart devices.

The fact alone that they are making such an effort to implement these services into the Switch version as well already speaks volumes to support that.

@ThanosReXXX good point. I'm old school. To me a console is a thing you play games on. The idea of browsers and video is something that escapes me. I browsed walkthroughs for games i was playing on wiiu..... that's about it. No logins. They can't get more data than exists on the machine, so it all just gameplay in my world. But you're right for others there's more.

How disgraceful is it that we even need to be taking about this? And that people seem not to care?

@BravelyDavid yeah, there's this wired myth among Nintendo fans that if Nintendo just built a powerful vcr box, third party would return and it would be a one stop shop. The v trouble is that myth isn't based on any realistic reason. 3p would have no financial reason to return, and a lot of reason to continue marginalizing the brand. Meanwhile, Nintendo wouldn't have a unique hardware proposition and would lose meaningful differentiation that would convince owners of other consoles you buy theirs too. It would be a disaster.

For better or worse, the ship for Nintendo to overtake sony or pcs sailed with the N64, and the GCN was one last push to try, showing why trying again would be plain silly.

The good news is switch looks poised to be a runaway hit, proving a good console with its own identity can be popular along with another console!

@NEStalgia Being old skool ain't going to protect you from everything, my friend. Those OS layers I was talking about, are always operational. It is true that they can mine less, or to be more exact: they can connect less dots if you don't use your (social) media logins on your console, but there's still enough interesting data left for them to use.

As for why people don't seem to care: to be honest, normally, I really don't come across many like minds when it concerns topics like this. And that is one of the reasons that I used to think that it was primarily because I was "in the know" because of me being in sales & marketing, and in my circle of family and friends no one else is in the same line of business, so all of them are okay with this as well.

Only every once in a while, when something scary that's PC or smart device related pops up in the news, do they pay attention, but that too fades away all to soon after a few days at most, whereas I immediately take action to try and protect myself.

Just an example: I don't know how that goes on your end of the pond, but over here, they can make news items about how you should not open weird emails from someone that you don't know almost every month, and there will STILL be multiple people that fall into this trap anyways, so apparently, the warning signs don't stick with people.

And that's only one of the many troubles that PC's or smart devices can bring you, if you don't take care of your own safety. Personally, I'm also always baffled by people never thinking twice about storing their personal videos and pictures in the cloud. And then crying and complaining about it if they end up on some shady site, just like those celebrity leaks a while back...

Most people just seem perfectly fine with accepting that "it's just the way it is" and if you want to use such devices, then stuff like that comes with the territory. But I'm not about to be some kind of active reminder for them. If they don't care, then I don't either.

When things go South, though... I'll be first in line to tell them "I told you so"...

This just sounds really off. They "struggling"? Long after they've announced the game? I smell B.S.

No game should be announced unless it is almost guaranteed that it will be ready for release. I'm still holding out for this, but I won't lose any sleep over it.

@NEStalgia That is my reaction also when people say Nintendo released underpowered hardware. It's a freaking tablet! Just because they choose to market it as a home console hybrid doesn't mean all logic of what it physically is should be thrown out the door. Ah well.

@NEStalgia

Beta was the superior through & through. I'm amazed the die-hard Sony fans aren't reminded of that often.

I'm not sure what you mean by that but Sony made Betamax.

@NEStalgia "there's this wired myth among Nintendo fans that if Nintendo just built a powerful vcr box, third party would return and it would be a one stop shop."

It will never happen. No one console will provide everything you need. Plus third parties have very little incentive other than being moneyhatted to help a rival software company do better.

@DESS-M-8 Why did you Label all those series as part 3? Pilotwings has already had three installments, Golden Sun, too. And Star Fox has already had six games, even if you don't count the soon-to-be-released Star Fox 2.

@NEStalgia @ThanosReXXX It's a lot easier to track someone if they aren't aware of how the digital dots connect, and it's a lot easier for them to accept being watched and recorded when there's not physically someone there doing it. You can bet a lot of people would be up in arms if someone were at their house for the purpose of collecting their data, regardless of any reasons such as "protecting from bad guys" or other bogus answers. But if it's being done remotely, and can only be detected with script or tracker blockers and network monitoring? That's how you know who is technically inclined and cares enough about it. Even a simple tracker blocker like Ghostery teaches you a lot about the people who run each website. (Including this one, to stick my neck out...)

Also, a lot of people won't believe you even if you're family when it comes to this issue. They will only accept words from the horse's mouth. And as we all know, horses can't actually talk...

I'm not sure if the difficulty here is necessarily because of raw specs so much as the online elements being too tough to parse over. Yeah, the Wii U had some online integration outaide of a straight multiplayer match with various titles, but even the original Demon's Souls on the PS3 was more involved with online integration. There's no way to directly port that over, you'd have to start from scratch to accommodate the NS. Which probably isn't worth it, ultimately. On the other hand, BotW only worked so well on the NS as an open world title because it's single player. And it still doesn't have optimal performance.

@PlywoodStick You don't have to tell me, man. Preaching to the choir, my friend, preaching to the choir...

But seriously: I do try to help my family and friends whenever possible. I'm not really THAT evil that I would gloat over them falling for some online scheme or trap.

First order of business: uBlock Origin, unchecky, Malwarebytes and Autorun Eater installed on every PC, and no clicking on weird emails...

P.S.

As I already mentioned in a previous comment, that straight from the source stuff also doesn't work that good, just going by how often people fall for dozens of schemes all the time, all year round, even though it's in the news on a regular basis. Most people watch it, experience some level of shock and awe, and then go about their business again, forgetting all about it the next day.

@PlywoodStick i use the example often about "if someone were following tout around with a clipboard..." "it's different!".. ..ugh.

I wouldn't trust ghostery too much.... it itself is a tracker, run by one of the ad kings, selling the info of how to get around the blocking......

@thanosrexxx ill wait until i have a real keyboard to textwall reply to your two

@banacheck yeah, i know, that's what i meant

@thesilverbrick

Star fox has only had two main entries in Star Fox and Star Fox 64, all the others were spin offs. After star Fox 2 is released then yeah I'd agree a new one would be Star Fox 4

Pilotwings only had 2 main titles and a handheld version in 3DS which I wasn't including.

Golden Sun..... haven't played it since 2 and had no idea they'd released one in 2010 on the DS. So yeah, would be Golden Sun 4

@NEStalgia spot on.

@DESS-M-8 What about Assault? That certainly wasn't a spinoff. And just because Pilotwings Resort was on a handheld doesn't make it not a part of the series.

This is one port I would not mind skipping. Also, it's not a graphically demanding game. Ubisoft always complicates stuff.

@thesilverbrick assault isn't a "star fox" game. Same as Mario Strikers isn't a Mario "game" course it means it's not part of the series.

Part of the same franchise obviously, but a series means an actual sequence and order by its very definition.

Resident Evil 1-7 are "res evil" games, umbrella chronicles is not.

Etc etc etc

@DESS-M-8 I'm not sure I follow. So you're saying a series has to be numbered for to be considered a series? By that logic, Super Mario Sunshine, Super Mario Galaxy, Super Mario 3-D World, New Super Mario Bros. and several other games are not Mario games.

Star Fox Assault is mechanically similar to prior entries in the series (it's a space shooter with animals, not a sports or racing game featuring the characters), follows the storyline and is a continuation of Star Fox 64, both in terms of gameplay and exposition. You're saying it can't be called a Star Fox game unless it was called Star Fox 3? If so, Star Fox 64 isn't part of the series, either. It's not the 64th entry in the series.

After Zelda 1 and 2 on the NES, Nintendo stopped numbering the entries in the series, but it doesn't make them not a series anymore.

@thesilverbrick that's right, they are not series.

Mario galaxy is its own series. Mario world games are there own series, paper mario is its own series.

Metroid primes is its own series, metroid is its own series.

Pilotwings 64 IS pilotwings 2, Nintendo chose to use the '64' moniker for series titles on that hardware, same as they employed 'super' to titles on the SNES.

Not really sure what you're finding so hard to grasp

@DESS-M-8 Frankly, that's your own personal definition of a series. One look at the Star Fox Wikipedia page will tell you that the public at large disagrees on your definition.

And besides, games like Adventures and Assault follow the story line and chronology of the other Star Fox games. They can be fit into a timeline with the other games. I fail to see why Assault isn't part of the series but 64 is.

@WhiteTrashGuy Ubisoft Romania ported the Wii U version within two months and it was left sitting around for a further 6 months.

Atleast Ubisoft seem to be trying this time.

@thesilverbrick my definition of the word series, isn't mine, it is the actual definition of the word series. It's not there to be disagreed with, it's just fact. You and the wiki "keyboard warrior" race sadly don't have juristiction over the definitions of words and what your understanding (or lack) of their meanings are.

Not really sure why you're getting upset either? Unless you are just surfing to look for arguments you're not equipped to enter into?

No where in this rumor has it been said this is a 'horsepower' issue but of course most will jump on it as that. It sounds like this is a gimped Nintendo online network problem, or possibly just that the game is made for always online and the Switch doesn't properly fit that paradigm. I really like Ubi and greatly appreciate their support for Nintendo. I bought a lot of their games on WiiU and considered some of them to be solid versions. AC4, Rayman, and SplinterC BL were all very well done on WiiU. I am greatly looking forward to the Mario+Rabbids game (I love SRPG) and the toys to life space game actually looked cool to me even though its aimed at the youngsters. Steep port totally baffles me. Why bother? It wasn't that good of a game and didn't sell that well. So I don't understand why, take a property that no one cares about, bring it to Switch and then when it sells like poo say N fans don't support 3rd party. It sold like crap on x86 twins 100mil install base why would it sell on Switch? I would so rather see another Zombii, or how about a new Red Steele game as 2 was very solid and they could take it further with improved motion controls and HD visuals. Also if rabbids is a success have that guy do a TC srpg follow up to ghosts on 3DS. I would rather Ubi trash Steep and give us something AC.

Also I am soo damned tired of the 'power' conversation. Too many people do not know a damned thing about system designs and scalable engines and software development. For god sakes half the games people mention ran on ps360 which was significantly less powerful than Switch. Games like X-com, and Borderlands came to the Vita for gods sakes.

@DESS-M-8
se·ries
ˈsirēz/
noun
1.
a number of things, events, or people of a similar kind or related nature coming one after another.
"the explosion was the latest in a series of accidents"
synonyms: succession, sequence, string, chain, run, round;
2.
a set of related television or radio programs, especially of a specified kind.
"a new drama series"
synonyms: serial, program, show, drama;

The Star Fox games (the SNES original, 64, Adventures, Assault and Command) are all in sequential order. They are of related nature and come one after another. They fit the dictionary definition of a series. You're the one arbitrarily excluding games from the series for reasons you can't seem to articulate clearly.

And I don't see why you're getting hostile. I have no emotional investment in this discussion. And I never considered this an argument. Just trying to understand where you're coming from.

@ballistic90 well lets just hope this game gets release on Switch so some people here can rest properly.

@NEStalgia sorry but no. Lets not lie to ourselves. Nintendo did created subpar hardware again. They have done this forever and is the reason there is no third party support since SNES.

@thesilverbrick you are complete miss reading the definition. A series is a sequential order or related factors.

Captain America is a series.
Avengers is a series.
They do not combine to make a series.
Star Fox, Star Fox 64 are a series.
Assault is a stand alone game.
Adventures is a stand alone game.

Star fox is defined by the play mechanic established in the initial game. A forward progressing space shooter. A play mechanic repeated in the second game in the series, Star Fox 64.

Rare made a an RPG for gamecube, that Nintendo substituted the lead character out for Fox McCloud. This established an entirely different type of game and had very little bearing on the Star Fox formula. Adventures is barely even classed as a spin off as it is merely a re-badging of a completely different game altogether, if anything it presented he possibility for a whole other series that never received a sequel, so never became a series.

If you cannot understand that basic concept then, fair enough, all games with the same character in are all the same series, yes.

@Jessica286 That's not the reason. The N64 was more capable than the PlayStation at 3D, and the GameCube was more powerful than the PS2. Nintendo used to have terrible policies towards third party developers and that was initially what drove them towards the PlayStation when that became available.

The Switch is not nearly as "underpowered" as people seem to think. Different processor architecture is a huge obstacle to porting (especially since PS4, Xbox One and PC all use the same processor type), but game engines that are built with full Switch support demonstrate reasonably close levels of capabilities.

@DESS-M-8 And this is where we agree to disagree. It seems to me what you're doing here is breaking the Star Fox series up into various sub-series of your own demarcation. In no way do I see Assault as a standalone game. It, like Star Fox and Star Fox 64, is a space shooter and uses the template and mechanics of its predecessors. It continues the story and features the same characters. And while Adventures is beyond a doubt radically different in terms of just about everything, the narrative and characters are cohesive with the rest of the series. It's inextricably linked to other Star Fox games in chronology and themes. Star Fox, 64, Adventures, Assault and Command tell a story in a series.

And as far as your Captain America/Avengers analogy is concerned, you're correct there. Reason being, in the Captain America movies the titular character gets central billing and is a story focused on him exclusively. The Avengers movies, while featuring Captain America, are not primarily focused on him and tell a story about a group of people. Every single one of the Star Fox games features the same core cast, is set in the same universe, and is part of one long over arcing story. And with the exception of Adventures, they all are of the same genre, as well. They fit the dictionary definition of a series perfectly.

But I digress. It seems we could have this discussion back-and-forth and run around in circles forever. If you want to personally break up the series into various parts for your own personal categorization, who am I to stop you? But you'll be disappointed if you expect Nintendo to name a future Star Fox game "Star Fox 3".

What a shame, I'd really love if Steep would come to the Switch since it was one game that had my attention, but it seems the silence this year was telling of this.
I wouldn't be surprised if the port is cancelled without fanfare in the next months, unless Nintendo devs manage to fix the mess. And even then, we may get a buggy mess.

@Jessica286 wiiu was subpar because it exceled at nothing. It's concept attempted to drive it, and was cool, but it didn't justify the hardware being what it was. Switch is a powerhouse. It's the most powerful mobile device under $900. Shield tablet runs the same soc but runs bloated android, bogging it down. Unveltilated mobile devices can't push power as far without baking. Surface book is more powerful and weighs in at a whopping $1500 to START. People accept these devices as equally premium with different use cases. Gaming seems to be the only place where the "i don't care about portability" crowd doesn't get that. Mobile is the biggest sector in the tech industry. Powerful pcs stagnated and declined years ago.

Comparing it to a ps4 is unfair. Nobody compares ipad and iphone to a macbook pro negatively based on raw power. Nobody compares surface book negatively to a Xeon workstation that cost the same on raw power. Recognizing what category the product is matters. It's a weak tethered box next to ps4 (not that weatknext to x1) but way more powerful than other mobile devices, more suited to gaming than laptop pcs. You could say "them they shouldn't say is a home console", but why not? Its a way more powerful homme console than their prior one, too.

Seems like an interesting game, but I was surprised when it was announced for the Switch... it just doesn't seem like the sort of title that would be worthwhile putting that much effort into porting over.

"Except the direct comparisons we have (Zelda, Fast RMX and MK8D) show a clear improvement"

Zelda and Mariokart look only slightly sharper. I don't know about Fast though, but I suspect its the same story. They are just ports.

@thanosrexxx,

Yeah, the online may be a issue (maybe). As for the engine: Doesn't Mario+Rabbids also use that engine? Of course that game is custom-made for the Switch, so that may be easier for them. Besides they probably get a lot of help from Nintendo.

@Henmii Yes, Mario+Rabbids also uses the Snowdrop engine, but obviously the aesthetics of that game and the accompanying assets are quite a bit simpler than a realistic winter sports game.

But at least we do know that the engine can run on the Switch, so that's a positive thing.

@NEStalgia Still waiting for that "real keyboard text wall reply" from you on this topic here...

"but obviously the aesthetics of that game and the accompanying assets are quite a bit simpler than a realistic winter sports game"

Agreed.

@NEStalgia I get what u r saying, that Nintendo compensates innovation for raw power. I think the Switch will be successful but that doesn't neglect the fact that Nintendo has never being about power not even in the Sega days. The thing is Sony ended up being more successful than Sega ever did therefor ending Nintendo's reign. Now Nintendo is in a position in where they will never recuperate the hardcore market and specially if they keep putting innovation over raw power. Thats why saying "massive blow" is an overstatement cause this has been Nintendo's game for quite some time by now. They just don't succeed cause of third parties or hardcore market they do so on their own.

@ballistic90 Please stop. Nintendo hardware has always being subpar and they compensate that with innovation. But Sega hardware was always better and so did Sony hardware. Plus the fact of Nintendo's refusal of moving towards CD properties back in the day of PS1.

@Jessica286 the N64 was more graphically capable than either the PlayStation or the Saturn. If you believe otherwise, then I have a bridge to sell you.

Just for perspective, I'm a computer engineer. I work on computers for a living and have done plenty of programming. I know what I am talking about.

@Jessica286 They did the power race thing until the Wii (against the wiser insights of Yokoi.) SNES was the most powerful. It sold worse than NES. N64 was the most powerful (albeit with memory and storage limitations), and sold worse than SNES. GCN was the most powerful (until the late-gen entry of XBox(1 (not One))) It sold worse than N64.

The industry went with large cheap storage for recorded FMV and music instead of fast loading expensive carts. It didn't hurt that Sony was paying out big to convince companies to do so. They more or less bought their way to victory and used that position to reshape the landscape to align with their visions and values. But I always find it funny when people think Nintendo didn't get into the power arms race when they had the most powerful system until the 7th gen, where they rightly finally realized selling power wasn't working. Sony certainly wasn't selling power until the PS3, and they were winning. PS1 and PS2 were the weakest consoles of their gens (PS1 launched as the most powerful, and PS2 was heavily subsidized and was powerful at launch, but that launch window didn't last longer than the Genesis' window over SNES) Sega was selling a good bit more power, and Nintendo topped them both.

So power didn't sell systems. Being powerful didn't make the GCN/N64 the winner, and being underpowered didn't make the PS1/PS2 the loser. Now we talk about how Nintendo lacks power parity with the other systems. What changed?

Microsoft changed. They entered into the console market, brought the PC developers with them, and brought the WIntel sales model with them. That was half the point of XBox (the other was the DirectX API and ensuring it's dominance in development). That does not reflect the CURRENT leadership at XBox. Phil's peddling the 1X, but they're more about the ecosystem now than pushing hardware updates, but back then it was all about bringing the PC model into games consoles. The PS3 being supercharged, super-priced was as much a reaction to the unsustainable Xbox(1) as anything. This whole argument of power really comes entirely from the XBox(1)/PS3/X360 trilogy. Oddly we discard generations of console sales wisdom based on the chestnut of 1.5 gens of hardware and rewrite the narrative from "powerful consoles never win the gen" to "all consoles need equal power!" A tribute to Microsoft's success in dragging PC developers and their business models with them.

Nintendo's early leadership ended largely because up against Sony's VERY deep (at the time) pockets (they expended a lot of those pockets though...), and their dominance in media format and distribution, along with a colossal marketing push was simply impossible for anyone to directly counter. Not even Microsoft can shake the impact that campaign had. It was the right product at the right time, aimed with very successful marketing at the right group, and the win reshaped the industry overall.

I don't think it's fair to say Nintendo can't recapture the hardcore market. I don't think Nintendo ever lost the hardcore market they originally had, for the types of games they originally had. They didn't lose anything so much as didn't gain the new markets created by Sony and Microsoft (part of which was carried over from the old Sega market.) When we talk about hardcore gamers from the golden days of Nintendo, most of those games, series and genres remain Nintendo-locked, and most of the audience still plays them (in greater numbers than before!) What they don't have under their umbrella is the "games as movies" cinematic type experience that came into being in the Playstation and PC spheres, outside Nintendo's ecosystems. But they can't lose a market they never had. They tried catering to that market only twice: The GameCube, and the WiiU. Both prove why doing so isn't too wise for them. Switch may be a third try but not as a focus this time but as a nice "also."

Ultimately the Switch, despite it's comparative graphical weakness remains more compelling for 3rd parties than a "powerful Nintendo box" would be. A powerful Nintendo box gives them no real new market they don't already have on the 3 other platforms. A Switch on the other hand may let them tap a whole additional consumer base interested in mobility, not interested in a home console. I think if Switch continues momentum, and if Switch gains a notoriety for being very popular in handheld mode, a lot of 3rd parties might give it a shot. "Supporting all systems" nets them no real gains. Supporting different types of platforms with totally different sets of consumers opens new markets for them. They all dabbled in tablets but found consumers were unwilling to spend real money up front, and android fragmentation was a mess. But a uniform console with a consumer base used to full price games? They'll never ever consider parity. But porting a few key games? They may be tempted as Switch builds success.

Steep was pretty ambitious of Ubisoft to try. It shows publisher interest. The always online thing of many of their games presents hurdles though. This game didn't really need that. It's a shame if that's the limitation. It's not a graphically intense game, so its doubtful the limitation is the graphics. OTOH, if Nintendo is indeed committing resources to making it work, that opens up more Ubi games in the future.

@ThanosReXXX Yeah, I tend to forget to come back to these things! And I forget half of what I was going to say. Ugh. Short term memory (don't hate me, I'm trying to figure out Minecraft....it's using up my organic CPU...darn 6 year olds and their impressive Minecraft skill...)

I'll touch on the 2 points I was mostly looking at. Email warnings and things. For a lot of people, it's not that theyr'e not interested, it's that they really don't have an "instinct" for telling the real ones from the fake ones. And it's that theyr'e so rushed on the job and have so drilled into them to not miss a single important message, they feel compelled to open everything to make sure. Heck some of them are convincing enough I can't tell just from glancing if it's legit. I manually go through the headers to figure it out before opening....but MOST people aren't going to be able to sort that out...they just know if it's real, and they don't read it, they're in trouble. Plus complacency that the antivirus will catch all the bad stuff. But I'm not sure people don't care so much as they can't tell the difference and don't understand it all anyway so they go back to ignoring it.

Second item: I agree so much on videos and pictures! I will not EVER understand people willing to put this stuff online. Not just for the obvious "bad people putting personal pics on shady servers after hacking something" but for the much more common: You're feeding both the tracking companies, AND bad individuals DIRECT visual information about you, your whereabouts, etc. etc. There's so much information to glean just from a few pictures and videos. But people want to "share" everything like everyone had a brain swap with Barney the purple dinosaur

@NEStalgia No worries about your memory issues and stuff. If I would have to hate someone over that, I wouldn't even have time left to actually live my own life...

To me, the thing with the emails is indeed complacency and simple ignorance, although good point on them possibly also thinking that antivirus will take care of it. (which mostly only works if you use something like Outlook anyways. I personally don't store any emails locally)

If you receive a physical letter, you also check who it is from, so why you wouldn't do that with an email is beyond me, honestly. And because these scam artists often come from either African or Eastern European countries, their English isn't really up to snuff in most cases either, so that should also ring some alarm bells, but no, apparently not.

Whatever the reason, I just think it is very dumb, in general.

Good that we agree on the online photo/video storage, and good point on the whole tracking and gathering of personal info. The thing that bothers me the most, like with the emails, is that here too, complacency seems to have taken over: having your own cloud storage drive on your phone is simply (seen as) normal, and we think nothing of it, until it goes wrong.

To me, the methods for preventing all this misery seem like nothing more than common sense, but apparently I'm a member of a very small group of people that seems to think so.

Or maybe I'm just getting too old for all these modern and highly "convenient" shenanigans...

P.S.

What was up with the "real" keyboard comment anyway? You do have a PC, right?

@ThanosReXXX Yeah for emails, well I don't know about personal emails, I generally only do personal emails with a very small handful of people, and obviously businesses I deal with, but for WORK emails, most people are expected to just go down the list as fast as possible and handle every email. The fact that the preview pane somehow became standard use in email a decade+ ago (I, for one do NOT use that!) means people feel they're just selecting spreadsheet rows and seeing the contents. They don't even understand they're opening the emails. I can see how people not in the know (including (if not especially) management) see no risk there. (And I also see the results of that thinking often enough ) But I can easily see how people don't really understand the nature of what's going on. Half the time I don't, and I'm the security nut that encrypts everything and walls it behind 256+bit entropy passwords Even my NL login is....extreme...

BUT there's a convenience cost to all that. And even for me there are times I don't employ my own security. There's enough junk to manage and deal with that you can't always keep up with everything from every angle. AND jump through all the hoops of security.

As long as people keep being told "the cloud!" "Internet 2.0", whatever buzz word is the current one for it, is the future of all mankind and can do nothing but make life convenient (here, put all your CC numbers in a cloud server, and have this computer remember your login! What could go wrong?!) people will be oblivious. The marketing tells them it's safe as they walk into the thresher.

Things stored on phones are quite the triple edged sword, aren't they? On one hand it's convenient access in a relatively securable way to many things. You can encrypt the phone with strong encryption, you can apply a high entropy password (but then you have to type it!) and it's all pretty well safe. Especially with a hard lockout for failed attempts. But then if you apply a high entropy password, getting into your own phone is so inconvenient you might as well not use it? I use cloud storage quite sparingly, only for unimportant things. Or if it's important, it's very nicely encrypted I was in one of those cloud storage data breaches ages ago. Luckly nothing of even remote value was there.

What amazes me though is "Oh google lets me store my pictures for free!" . Yes, and WHY do you think they're letting you do that? They just love supplying redundant server farms and fiber lines to everyone on earth out of generosity ? Do their investors know this?

(Edit: Oh and the keyboard, yeah I have more PCs than I know what to do with And what do I use half the time? The phone! I'm addicted to the Note, the only phone worth using, due to that stylus. (Shame the next one is rumored to be a whopping $900!) But a Switch, a hotspot, and the phone is pretty much all I need to do anything but write text walls to you and rjejr )

@NEStalgia If businesses open these kinds of emails, it's actually even dumber, but then again: the recent ransomware attacks show that many companies do, and are also running obsolete software, something that's even worse.

But all I have been saying was more related to private/civilian use. People at home getting emails from "their" bank, written in bad English (or Dutch, over here) that says that they have to click on a link to verify their account and what not. And even though things like these are in news programs and talk shows almost every other month, people still fall for it, and I just can't wrap my head around that.

As for cloud storage: the only time I ever use that, is when I use WeTransfer to send someone a big file. Other than that, the cloud can suck it, far as I am concerned. It already royally p****d me off that I had to manually disable that on my new Samsung Galaxy phone for my photos and videos, because the default setting was automatic backup to the cloud.

According to me, that should be a choice of the user, NOT the other way around. But who am I, right?

@ThanosReXXX Oh. Businesses do. Chronically.

Oh, you mean that email from Walmart asking me to confirm the identity of the user for holdering of the account by replying with my usernom, passkey, and the card number for a $10 gifter card wasn't legit?!? Darn these skilled masters of deception!

Yeah, I disdain "the internet 2.0" "cloud" in all it's forms. Remote file storage CAN be useful (particularly if it's PAID storage...as in a subscription for private service...) but not for actual important things, but for quick transfer of generic things. I used to facilitate my own FTP servers for that but too many firewalls block FTP. I do have a web server I can use as my own private "cloud" now, but that doesn't integrate with phones nicely. I basically use one subscription service (that HAS been hacked before...guess what service?), to store general text based reminders, user manuals, measurements/replacement part numbers, stuff like that. I certainly do NOT use it for pictures, with the lone exception of Lightroom's mobile syncing, since I do use that part of Adobe's (also hacked) photography suite. I trust Adobe's security about equally with Sony's however. It doesn't do anything normal non "cloud" services didn't used to do back when the internet was P2P (remember those days when it was supposed to be a client-server decentralized internet before they redesigned "the cloud" to mimic 1970's mainframes on a planetary scale? Yeah, so do I.... Let's just start running AS/400 again and it can be like the good old days! I'm pretty sure I have a vt-100 around here somewhere....)

Eww, did Samsung or did Google enable the automatic cloud backups? I "love" how Google offers that "service" for Android phones. Back up your ENTIRE phone to the cloud. In Google's benevolent care. What could there possibly be to fear?

@NEStalgia I think Samsung enabled it. I can't imagine that the Gallery app in their phones is from Google, but I'm not entirely sure.

And I don't use subscription or login based upload services. That is the very reason that I use WeTransfer. Upload, enter the email address it's supposed to go to and ready. And using it, is even a big word, since in general, I use it only a handful of times per year.

But now that we're completely off-topic, how about turning this vehicle around back to a Nintendo-related topic?

I just watched this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOCfLN0bKcg

It's a long one, almost 48 minutes, but it is entertaining to watch, at least: if the subject matter interests you. This guy made a video about him saving and repairing an old NES console and some games that have been lying in the dirt in a barn. He even dubbed it "The Barntendo".

So, whenever you've got a small hour to kill somewhere during the week, give it a go. If anything, it's actually a relaxing video because of the tempo and the guy's narration skills.

@NEStalgia @ballistic90 I google and yes the big N was better in terms of power. So this basically solidifies my argument against Slige in the Call of Duty article. Nintendo try power and it didn't work, they are now in the race for blue oceans. So Call of Duty not showing up here isn't a "massive blow" like he said. Quite frankly the Switch will be a success with or without third parties but I don't think the Switch will suffer from lack of third party. I don't see westerns joining in hordes but I do see Japanese developers on board much like the 3DS which will make the Switch a success. Why would Nintendo repeat their past strategy when it didn't work for them? End note, Slige is wrong.

@Jessica286 third party success is always a different game on Nintendo systems. Third party games are the bread and butter of PlayStation and Xbox consoles, but can be considered an afterthought on Nintendo consoles. Often it creates the cycle of half ass ports with poor marketing that self justify the developers not bothering. It's not a death blow to Nintendo, but it means developers need to pay attention to make it work.

@ballistic90 Nah I don't think COD is what will sell people the Switch. Is always bad not getting support but it ain't the end.